City Council Agenda Packet 12-10-1990C
CG
AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, December 10, 1990 - 7:00 p.m.
Mayor: Ken Maus
Council Members: Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Shirley Anderson, Dan
Blonigen
1. Call to order.
2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held November 26,
1990.
3. Citizen comments/petitions, requests, and complaints.
4. Public hearing on adoption of 1991 budget and consideration of
resolution setting 1991 tax levy. 0 S,C� oM'P—
5. Consideration of final plat request to replat portions of the
Sandberg East residential subdivision. Applicant, John
Sandberg.
6. Consideration of renewing joint fire agreement with Monticello
Township.
7. Consideration of a resolution establishing an additional
deferred compensation plan for municipal employees.
B. Consideration of replacement of tractor mower/snowblower for
the parks department.
9. Consideration of Adopt -a -Street program terms and conditions.
10. Considoration of curb-sido recycling program for plastics.
11. Consideration of bills for the first half of December.
12. Adjournment.
I
I
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, November 26, 1990 - 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Shirley
Anderson, Dan Blonigen
Members Absent: None
Approval of minutes.
Warren Smith requested that his name be deleted from the list
of members present at the November 13, 1990, Council meeting.
There being no further changes to the minutes as proposed, a
motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Shirley Anderson, to
approve the meeting minutes of the meeting held November 13,
1990, along with the proposed correction. Voting in favor:
Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Dan Blonigen.
Abstaining: Warren Smith.
3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints.
None forthcoming.
4. Consideration of proposals for replacement of control center
at wastewater treatment plant.
Public Works Director, John Simola, reviewed the four
proposals that had been submitted to the City to replace the
wastewater treatment control center. Of the four firms
submitting proposals, the two firms of Bentoc and Dynamic
Systems are being recommended for further review.
Bentec Engineering proposed a system that would use a large
portion of the existing wiring in the control center and would
also feature a Mitsubishi PLC and PC driven system. The cost
of tho Bentoc System is $47,663. Dynamic systems proposed a
full and complete replacement of the existing control center
at a price of $85,750, using a PLC system with a "panel view"
center.
John Simola noted that the original control center which
caused us so many problems was installed by Bentoc through a
Joint effort with Edison Controls Equipment; therefore, staff
is somewhat concerned about selecting the Bentoc system
without careful consideration even though the price is
attractive.
Pago 1
P
Council Minutes - 11/26/90
Hen Maus asked if Bentec's inability to provide service was
due to faulty equipment that they were using in conjunction
with the control center. John Simola responded by saying that
this could be a factor in why Bentec had problems servicing
our equipment as well as a disillusion of associations between
Bentec and Edison Controls. Simola went on to note that
Dynamic Systems appears to have an excellent track record and
currently has a number of treatment plants operating using the
same system that is proposed, whereas the exact system that
Bentec proposed is not operating in conjunction with any
wastewater treatment plant at this time.
Dan Blonigen noted that we should not be looking at the low
dollar in this situation. We have had problems with the
Bentec systems in the past, and it may not be wise to make the
same mistake by selecting this firm to install our new control
center. Shirley Anderson, Fran Fair, and Warren Smith
concurred.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson,
seconded by Dan Blonigen, to direct staff to continue the
selection process and narrow down the possible candidates to
Bentec Engineering Corporation and Dynamic Systems. Motion
carried unanimously.
5. Consideration of establishing a strategv for selecting a Citv
Attorney.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill outlined a proposed process
for selecting a City Attorney. O'Neill suggested that the
Council establish an ad hoc committee to assist staff with
selection of candidates for subsequent interview by Council.
The Committee could also prepare a request for proposal form
and advertise the position opening. The request for proposals
form would include questions regarding fees and also includes
specific questions regarding various areas of municipal law,
including labor laws, planning, zoning, real estate, code
enforcement, etc. The information provided would help tho
City in determining to what extent each candidate's experience
matches the City's current needs. The ad hoc committee would
then review responses to the RFP and select candidates for
interview. Finally, Council interviews of candidates would
occur at the first regular meeting in January.
Ken Maus noted that there are able attorneys locally and all
should receive a close look; however, it may be wise at this
time for the City to open up the position to attorneys from
outside the city of Monticello that have specific experience
Pago 2
Council Minutes - 11/26/90
in city government. In addition, an attorney from outside of
the city would be less likely to experience a conflict of
interest situation.
Shirley Anderson stated that the City should be open to hiring
an attorney from outside the city of Monticello, and she is
willing to serve on the ad hoc committee. Dan Blonigen
concurred that we should look outside of the city. He would
like to see an aggressive attorney hired.
It was the consensus of Council to notify all local attorneys
directly of the position opening and consider applications
submitted by attorneys from outside of the city of Monticello.
Ken Maus noted that he would review the request for proposals
prior to it being submitted to interested candidates.
6. Consideration of establishino a date and time for a budqet
workshop.
A budget workshop date was set for November 30, 1990, at
9:30 a.m. P
7. Consideration of bills for the month of November,.
Motion was made by Warren Smith and seconded by Shirley
Anderson to approve payment of bills for the month of
November. Motion carried unanimously.
B. Other matters.
John Simola noted the success of the state wide adopt-a—
highway program and suggested that the City of Monticello
consider adoption of a similar program. It was the consensus
of Council that John Simola should go forward and prepare more -
information and a policy statoment rogarding this matter.
There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned.
Jeff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
C
Page 3
0
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
L_
d. Public hearinq on adoption of 1991 budget and consideration of
resolution settinq 1991 tax levy. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As part of the new truth in taxation requirements, the City is
required to hold a public hearing on the adoption of the 1991
budget and resulting tax levy. The actual tax levy adopted by
the Council must be submitted to the County Auditor's office
by December 28 to meet the guidelines.
At our budget workshop session held Tuesday, December 4, it
was the consensus of the Council that the proposed budget
resulting in a tax levy of $2,752,778 would be proposed at the
public hearing. This amounts to an approximate 7.28 increase
over last year's tax levy but still under the $2,830,352
maximum allowable. The maximum increase would have amounted
to approximately a 10.28 increase.
While public comments are encouraged and welcomed, the Council
can determine the actual tax levy increase to be reasonable.
Changes in the budget can still be made at Monday's meeting if
desired; and if additional time is needed by the Council
before setting the tax levy, the meeting can be continued
until 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, December 11.
Based on the expected increase in our market valuations within
the city, the actual tax levy increase amounts to less than a
68 increase, which is fairly close to the cost of living
adjustments projected. As was noted during the workshop
session, the budget should be considered merely a working
document and projection of anticipated revenues and
expenditures for next year, and major items would naturally be
again considered by the Council before purchases are made.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. After close of the public hearing, the Council should
adopt the resolution setting the tax levy requirements
for next year at $2,752,778.
2. Council could adopt a tax levy roquiremont loss than the
amount proposed but in no case higher than the amount
proposed.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The City staff recommends that the tax levy be adopted at the
$2,752,778 amount. This tax levy would still be $77,574 under
our legal lovy limit. Although there may be some areas whore
C.
Council Agenda - 12/10/40
reductions could be made in the tax levy requirements, I
believe the Council is being prudent in adopting the tax levy
as proposed in order to maintain our fund balance surpluses
for future nE:eds.
SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of resolution.
RESOLUTION 90 -
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1991 BUDGET AND
SETTING THE TAX LEVY
WHEREAS, the City Administrator has prepared and submitted to the
City Council a budget setting forth therein his estimated needs of
the City of Monticello for all operations and the debt service for
the fiscal year commencing January 1, 1991, and;
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the same and has made such
changes therein as appear to be in the best interest of the City of
Monticello;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MONTICELLO that the budget so submitted by the City Administrator,
together with the changes made therein by the City Council, be and
same hereby is adopted as a budget for the fiscal year commencing
January 1, 1991, and;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Monticello
that there be and hereby is levied for the fiscal year commencing
January 1, 1991, and the following sums for the respective purposes
indicated therein upon the taxable property of the city of
Monticello, to wit:
REVENUE
General $1,444,290
Library 26,400
OAA 30,225
HRA 19,250
Tree 39,135
Transportation 19,787
DEBT RETIREMENT
Debt Service Fund 1,021,937
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Capital Improvement Revolving 151,754
TOTAL TAX LEVY $2,752,778
The above resolution was introduced by Councilmember
was duly seconded by Councilmember with the
following voting in favor thereof:
The following voting in the opposition:
C
0
D
Resolution 90 -
Page 2
The City Administrator is hereby instructed to transmit a certified
copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Wright County,
Minnesota .
Adopted this 10th day of December, 1990.
City Administrator
A
Mayor
D
t
CITY TAX INCREASE COMPARISON
Assuming a 7.1% increase in our tax levy for 1991, the following
are examples of the dollar increase to be expected for a typical
residential and commercial property:
1. Residential Home Valued at $75,000.
Pavable in 1990 Est. Payable in 1991
City Share of Taxes $132.67 $140.63
(Increase + $7.96 or approximately 5.98)
If this $75,000 home also had its market value increased by 28
because of inflation, taxes would increase by an additional $5.15
per year.
2. Commercial -Industrial Property Valued at $125,000.
Payable in 1990 Est. Payable in 1991
City Share of Taxes $738.61 $760.95
(Increase + $22.34 or approximately 3%)
Likewise, if a $125,000 valued property also had its market value
increased by 2% in 1991, the City's share of the taxes would
increase by an additional $21.26 per year.
0
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
Consideration of final plat request to replat portions of the
Sandberg East residential subdivision. Applicant. John
Sandberq. (J . O. )
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As you recall, at the November 13 meeting of the City Council,
Council granted preliminary approval of a request to replat
portions of the Sandberg East residential subdivision.
Council granted preliminary approval subject to three
conditions. Two of the conditions have been met at this time,
and it is likely that the third condition will be met in the
near f-iture. Staff requests that City Council consider
granting final approval of theplat with actual signing of the
plat to be withheld until such time that the third condition
has been met.
CONDITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MET
According to the meeting minutes of November 13, 1990, final
plat approval must be preceded by development of restrictive
covenants outlining construction and building restrictions
associated with Lot 3, Block: 1; Lots 10-16, Block 2; and Lot
3, Block 3. In addition, restrictive covenants should also be
recorded against Outlots A and B, which preserve both for use
as street right-of-way in conjunction with future development
of property now owned by Rod Norell. The document outlining
the restrictive covenants has been prepared and approved by
the City Attorney; therefore, the two conditions noted above
have been met. It is now up to staff to make sure that John
Sandberg signs the restrictive covenants and that the
covenants actually do get recorded.
CONDITIONS NOT COMPLETELY MET
In addition to the restrictions noted above, it was required
that the developer submit a complete grading and drainage
plan. The plan should includo potential home locations. Tho
plan should also be approved by the City Engineer prior to
final plat approval.
It is my understanding that Bret Weiss received the first
draft of the grading plan on Monday, November 30. He has
rosponclod to the first draft and submitted comments to Meyor-
Rohlin accordingly. It is not known at this time if the final
plan for drainage will be In complete form by the timo Council
meets. it does appear, howevor, that there should not be any
problems in granting final approval of the drainage plan so
long as all of the nocossary storm water oasemonts aro
included on the final plat or acquired via separate easement
documentation.
It is suggosted that in order to expedite this matter, it may
make senso to approve the f anal plat but withhold signing of
the plat until such time as all of the necessary storm
drainage related plans and rolatod easements aro in place.
Council Agenda - 12/10190
In addition, although not included as a condition noted with
the preliminary plat approval, it should be required that all
monumentation corner stakes be in place prior to signing of
the final plat. This should also Include removal of corner
stakes that are no longer valid. Removal of stakes associated
with the original plat will eliminate potential for confusion
in the future, which could result in a home being located
incorrectly.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve the final plat of the Sandberg East
Second Addition. Signing of the plat is subject to City
Engineer approval of grading and drainage plans and
subject to acquisition of necessary storm water drainage
easements and subject to updating of lot corner stakes.
Under this alternative, the final plat is approved;
however, recording cannot take place until such time that
all the storm drainage related requirements have been
met. This alternative provides the developer with the
opportunity to have the plat recorded prior to 1991 as
long as the storm water issues are resolved to the
satisfaction of the City.
2. Motion to deny approval of the final plat of the Sandberg 7
East Second Addition.
s If the City Council is not comfortable with granting
approval of the plat prior to completion of all of the
requirements noted at the previous Council meeting, then
this alternative should be selected. Under this
alternative, final plat approval could not be possible
until the January lA meeting of the City Council unless
there is a special meeting prior to that date. In
addition, the developer has indicated that he has made
plans to fly to Minnesota and attend the meeting on
December 10. Delaying the approval to another dale would
mean that he would have to fly up here a second time, and
he would like to avoid this potential.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the final plat of the Sandberg East
Socond Addition be approved because it is our view that the
conditions have boon mot or will be mot soon. in addition,
final recording of the plat will not be possible until it is
signed. This provides the City with the leverage we need to
be assured that the drainage plan is properly completed.
SUPPORTING DATA:
T Minutes from the meeting of November 13, 1990; Copy of the
i final plat; Copy of restrictive covonants.
Council Minutes - 11/13/90
Consideration of oreliminary plat request to replat portions
of the Sandberg East residential subdivision. Applicant, John
Sandberg.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that the proposed
replat creates three outlots and 22 platted lots. All of the
platted lots meet minimum requirements in terms of size and
lot dimension; however, of the 22 platted lots created, 9 do
not have immediate access to street frontage as required by
ordinance. Instead of providing a bona fide usable street
access, the plan provides for an adjoining outlot which
someday will become one-half of a future street right-of-way.
The other half will be supplied by the adjacent landuwner In
conjunction with further development of the area.
John Sandberg noted that the adjoining property owner, Rod
Norell, is In agreement with the planning arrangement as
proposed. He also added that the Planning Commission
supported the plat configuration so long as there is a method
by which future property owners could be made aware that the
lots platted without access to a public street are not
buildable. Sandberg noted that the City Attorney has stated
that restrictive covenants against each property that is
unbuildable would absolve the City of any I1atWity associated
with these properties. It was his view that this information
would diminish Planning Commission hesitency to approve the
preliminary plat. Sandberg also noted that the plat as
proposed will serve to establish a pattern for future
development that the adjoining property owner can follow.
John Sandberg also Informed Council that it was his intent to
keep tho lots that do not have access to public street for. an
Indefinite por. iod. Ile plans on developing them at such time
that the adjoining property owner is ready todevolop.
Ken Maus noted that after discussing this item with John
Sandberg, he fools more confident in the proposal to grant tho
variance and allow the subdivision to occur as proposed.
A motion was then made by Fran Fair, seconded by Dan 01 onIgon,
to grant approval to the preliminary roplat. of the Sandberg
East subdivision and yrant the variance to section 11-5-2 of
tho subdivision ordinance roquiring that overy lot must have
a minimum frontage as required in the zoning ordinance on a
City -approved street other than an alloy. The variance is
granted based on the finding that duo to annexation and City
extension of sower and water, it became nocossary to roplat
the property in order to achieve its boat use. Duo to the
Page 6
Council Minutes - 11/13/90
dimension of the property, it is not possible to plat the site
for its best present and future use without a variance to the
street access requirement. Approval of the final plat is
subject to the following conditions:
Restrictive covenants shall be recorded outlining
construction and building restrictions associated with
Lot 3, Block 1; Lots 10-16, Block 2; and Lot 3, Block 3.
Restrictive cuvenenLs shall be recorded against. OuLloLs A
and B which preserve both for use as street right-of-way
in conjunction with future development of property now
owned by Nor.ell.
Developers shall. submit a complete grading and drainage
plan. Plan shall include potential home locations. Plan
shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to final
plat approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
C
SANDBERG EAST SECOND ADDITION
I
1 "I -r-- - --� 1 � =o. pw pw-/ w by r p .... p•. � p r yb .wwr. b.wt Owt. o_w-.
A
o -�6c
_ p.y
♦ I b.T.� tr.bw . 4np Y w-nlww. YWi• . Ytt�.1 p • p—. M W.1. pp.M \W
f -- -nu. •w�w.�4•/ r��..�. •I wA.�M wpw wbp til•
1
�6
�r
1 "I -r-- - --� 1 � =o. pw pw-/ w by r p .... p•. � p r yb .wwr. b.wt Owt. o_w-.
A
o -�6c
_ p.y
♦ I b.T.� tr.bw . 4np Y w-nlww. YWi• . Ytt�.1 p • p—. M W.1. pp.M \W
f -- -nu. •w�w.�4•/ r��..�. •I wA.�M wpw wbp til•
1
November 27 , 1990
Mr. Jeff O'Neill
City of Monticello
P.O. Box 1147
Monticello, MN 55362
RE: Sandberg East
Dear Mr. O'Neill:
I have reviewed the proposed restrictive covenants for Sandberg East. I
suggest the possibility of including Outlot C for right-of-way dedication
under the covenants. The covenants should include a prohibition on amendmnts
without consent of the city council. The covenants expire after 20 years.
Pleaso contact me after you have had a chance to review these covenants.
Yours truly,
C --.-
Thomas D. Hayes
TDH/scm
File No. 90-18622
cc: Bradley V. Larson
D
SMITH & HAVES
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
.1...Y.. O.sIC[
1�.—T-1-0.111.
207 SOUTH WALNUT STREET
CINEMA PROFESSIONAL BLDG.
R.O. EOA 090
GREGORY Y. SMITH
957 MAIN ST.. SUITE 102
MONTICELLO. MINNESOTA 33]92.0999
GARY L. PRINGLE 119AG-19971
ELK RIVER. MINNESOTA 95300
-_
THOMAS O. HAYES
—
o—ce P..ONe 1.121 ....a290
o.nc a A..oNe m I m a[o-219T
M.--....8121--71030
—
RICHARD O. CLOUGH
RUTHE.KRONLOKKEN
November 27 , 1990
Mr. Jeff O'Neill
City of Monticello
P.O. Box 1147
Monticello, MN 55362
RE: Sandberg East
Dear Mr. O'Neill:
I have reviewed the proposed restrictive covenants for Sandberg East. I
suggest the possibility of including Outlot C for right-of-way dedication
under the covenants. The covenants should include a prohibition on amendmnts
without consent of the city council. The covenants expire after 20 years.
Pleaso contact me after you have had a chance to review these covenants.
Yours truly,
C --.-
Thomas D. Hayes
TDH/scm
File No. 90-18622
cc: Bradley V. Larson
D
`l, RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS OF SANDBERG EAST
WHEREAS, John W- Sandberg and Marguerite Sandberg, husband
and wife, have caused to be platted that certain land located in
the City of Monticello, County of Wright, State of Minnesota,
known as Sandberg East;
WHEREAS, as a condition of said platting procedure the
following lots are subject to this agreement as follows:
Lot 3, Block I,
Outlot A, Block 1,
Lots 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, Block 2,
Outlot B, Block 2,
Lot 3, Block 3,
That these lots are currently not buildable and the City of
Monticello will not issue building permits to the owners of
record of these lots as they are without access to public roads
and have no access to City services and there are presently no
guarantees that such services will ever be provided;
That the public is herein put on notice that the lots herein
referenced may be served with public services and may be assessed
at some future date for said services if installed;
L That Outlot A, Block 1 and outlet B, Block 2 are preserved
for use as a future public right-of-way and cannot be
resubdivided for any other purpose and are to be used only in
conjunction with the development of Outlot A. Sandberg East;
At such time as Outlot A of Sandberg East may be developed,
Outlot A of Block 1 and Outlet B of Block 2 shall be dedicated
for street and utility right-of-ways without cost to the
adjoining landowner or the City of Monticello;
Invalidation of any one of these covenants or restrictions
by judgment or court order shall in no way affect any of the
other provisions herein, which shall remain in full force and
effect for a period of 20 years from recording;
The foregoing restrictions and covenants run with the land
and shall be binding until twenty years from date hereof and
shall not be amended without the consent of the Monticello City
Council.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this
day of November, 1990.
John W. Sandberg
Marguerite Sandberg
16;
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
Consideration of renewinq ioint fire agreement with Monticello
Township. (R.W.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As part of the original annexation that took place in 1974
whereby the City annexed the NSP power plant, a Joint Advisory
Fire Board was established creating a joint fire board between
the City and the Township concerning the operation of the fire
department. From 1976 until 1985, for a period of ten years,
the original joint agreement indicated that Monticello
Township would reimburse the City for a portion of the fire
department cost based primarily on their percentage of
assessed valuation compared to the City's valuation. The
Township's payment for services provided by the fire
department varied annually but was usually between $3,000 and
$7,000 annually for the protection provided depending on the
capital outlay purchases made by the joint board. In summary,
during the first ten years of this joint agreement, the
Township probably covered less than 108 of the actual cost of
operating the department but were responsible for over half of
the fire calls made.
With the original agreement expiring in 1985, a revised joint
agreement was established which primarily contained the same
language but changed the method of the Township's contribution
toward the annual cost of operating the department. A formula
was used that has been established by the University of
Minnesota called a fair share formula, which primarily takes
into account the valuations of each member of the joint
agreement and the number of fires in each location to
determine the annual payment amount. The formula referred to
assessed valuations as being one criteria, with the second
major component being the number of fire calls in each
community. These two percentages were averaged; and ns d
result, Monticello Township saw their annual contribution
increase to currently approximately $30,000 or 1/3 of our
operating cost. While this may seem like a dramatic increase,
we should remember that for the past five years, Monticello
Township has actually had over 578 of the fires and,
therefore, does not seem unreasonable. In addition, the cost
used in determining annually the Township's share was not
actually tho total cost to the City in that the City normally
was responsible for the major cost up front such as a now fire
hall or purchasing a largo piece of equipment, and no interest
cost was over added. For example, the fire hall originally
cost over $550,000 for the building only; and within our
formula, nothing has been added to this cost for the bond
interest that the City has to pay to finance the improvement.
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
Although I do not see any major changes that are needed in the
basic agreement if the Council wishes to continue this
arrangement, a problem does exist in the formula terminology
in that there are no longer "assessed valuations," as the
State Revenue Department continually changes this terminology.
What used to be assessed valuations was changed to "gross tax
capacity valuations" and this year was changed to "net tax
capacity valuations." I will not try to get into a long
explanation on the differences between these terms, but the
end result is that the formula originally established may no
longer be appropriate.
While the concept of using both valuations and number of fire
calls in determining each community's fair share cost
allocation appears appropriate, I believe the best solution
may be to change the language to "market valuations," which is
something everybody can relate to. For example, the market
value of all property in the city for taxes payable 1990 was
$380,904,500. In Monticello township, the market value for
the same period was $84,757,900. The resulting percentage
would be that Monticello township is 18.28 of the total market
value of both communities. In the past, assessed valuations
and the new terms gross tax capacity and net tax capacity
values are based on what type of property it is for tax
purposes. A home of equal value in the township and in the
city may not be the same for the tax capacity values if one
was homesteaded while the other was rental property. It would
appear that for determining fire contract cost, it should make
no difference whether the house is rented or homesteaded or
whether the property is commercial or a farm if they're both
worth the same amount of money. That's why I believe market
va lue is a better determination of the amount of property
being protected by a fire department. The only problem with
us Ing market value now in the formula (if you want to call it
a problem) is that Monticello township would see an incruasu
in this portion of the formula. Under the old method, they
were approximately 109, 118, or 126 of the total; whereas by
utilizing markot value, they increase to 388. Using market
valuos from now on would amount to a 36 or 4% overall increase
in Lheir share of the cost, but I fool it would bo easier to
understand in the future.
While I'm sure that any adjustment that results in an increase
to the township may be opposed by the Township, I still
bellovo the Township is receiving a fair benefit for their
percontago contribution in operating our fire dopartmont.
When one considers that more than half of tho fire calls made
each year aro to service the township, I do not believe this
small increase would be detrimental to them. While this typo
of formula is used by many fire dopartmonts in arriving at a
contract fee when they service townships, there Is a
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
difference in our joint agreement in that Monticello township
is actually a part owner of some of our equipment under this
agreement. Normally, when you have a joint fire agreement and
the township also owns part of the equipment, it's on a 50/50
basis similar to what Big Lake and Big Lake Township do.
While this arrangement is not ideal in that theoretically the
Township does own part of our equipment, if we should ever
terminate our agreement, I am assuming that the Township would
not ever start their own fire department, and it really
becomes a moot point.
I have discussed the contract renewal with the Township Board
at a recent meeting, and we did not arrive at any solution
other than naturally the Township wants to keep their cost as
low as possible. They already feel they pay more than they
should; but in reality, they are receiving a fair benefit for
their contribution. The joint fire board also discussed the
contract renewal, and a recommendation on what type of formula
to use was not established. Overall, I believe our
relationship with the Township is progressing in the right
direction; but the fire department cost and contracting
arrangement should be determined on a fair allocation of who
benefits.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Agree to renew the contract and adjust the formula for
cost sharing by establishing market value in lieu of
formerly used assessed value in the fair share formula.
This will result in a slight increase to the Township but
I believe will be more understandable by future Council
and staff. Our agreement would not become outdated
annually when the DeparLuwnL of Revenue decides to change
terminology, as market value will always exist.
2. Agree to renew the contract but establish an entirely now
formula for determining the Township's contribution.
This could be accomplished by using a flat dollar amount
per parcel or home, which would be similar to how the
joint board contracts for Silver Crook Township. For
Silver Creek, the fire board charges $25 per parcel.
When applying this amount to Monticello Township, they
currently have approximately 1,200 parcels with buildings
on them, which amounts to approximately the same amount
of money they have boon contributing recently. The only
question in using an amount per parcel is that I believe
there should still be some additional charge for parcels
of vacant land that do not have buildings on them. In
addition, the $25 charge would also have to be reviewed
7 annually because it's based on our operating cost.
i
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
Table action on renewing the contract until more
information can be provided concerning a new equitable
cost sharing arrangement.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
while the fair share formula established five years ago has
merit, it is my opinion that market value would be a much
better indicator and is more easily understandable for
everyone. If Monticello Township's market value grows faster
than the City's, it would result in the Township picking up a
larger share of the fire cost annually; but then with their
market value going up, they would have to have more buildings,
homes, farms, and other properties that need fire protection.
Continued discussions with the Township on an agreeable
formula may not result in a compromise unless it's to the
Township's advantage. As a result, I feel the market value
Insertion in the formula makes sense and still provides the
Township with a reasonable share of the cost for the services
rendered by the department.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
r Copy of existing contract.
�► I contacted the Fire Center at the University of Minnesota
which helped establish the fair share formula used in our
present contract. The fair share formula has been in use for
a number of years by various communities, and the Fire Center
has now taken the position that utilizing any type of
valuation figures within the formula may not bo the best way
of allocating a fair share cost when determining a contract.
Thclr basic recommendation has boon recently that communities
should be considering only allocating cost based on the number
of hours It takes to f!.ght a fire in each township. They
believe this is a better, allocation formula In that the costs
arca spread based on tho number of fires and time spent
fighting those fires. While we have used this method as part
of the formula in the past, if we change the entire formula to
only indicate manhour cost within the formula, Monticello
Township's share would rise dramatically to over 57% of the
annual operating cost. while it does make sense that
contracting should be done on this basis, I'm sure this would
cause quite a stir with the Township if we increase their
percentage to over 57% of the total cost . I believe that
knowing many communities are going to this typo of system, it
only strengthens our position if we Insert market values as a
substitute in our present formula, which will result in a
slight increase but not. as dramatic as many communities are
imposing on townships. !
L
AN AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES 471.59
CREATING A JOINT FIRE BOARD BETWEEN `J
THE TOWN OF MONTICELLO AND THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
By this instrument the CITY OF MONTICELLO. a municipal corporation of
the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the City, and the
TOWN OF MONTICELLO, a corporate subdivision, State of Minnesota, hereinafter
referred to as the Town, agree with each other as indicated by the following
articles.
ARTICLE I: Explanatory Material
(A] The City and the Town presently own fire fighting equipment both jointly
and separately. The City owns a fire hall. The City operates an effective
and efficient fire department with volunteer fire fighters including
a chief.. It is assumed that, collectively, the CITY and the TOWN are
more financially able to provide fire fighting equipment and protection.
[B] The respective City Council and Town Board hereby find it advisable
to jointly assume the coat, maintenance, and operation of the fire department,
and to jointly purchase now fire fighting equipment, as may be doomed
necessary. The purpose of this contract is to provide for a joint sharing
of costa and purchasoo essential to the effective operation and maintenance
of a volunteer fire department.
(C) This contract has boon authorized by the City Council for the City of
Monticello and the Town Board for the Town of Monticello pursuant t0
Minnesota Statute Section 471.59 (Joint Exorcise of Powers).
ARTICLE II: Joint Advisory Board
(A] A Joint Advisory Fire Board, created pursuant to tho fire contract between
the City of Monticello and the Townahip of Monticello dated April 26, 1976,
sn
O
and executed June 3, 1976, is hereby extended to facilitate the performance
of this contract throughout its life. Such Board shall have the powers
i
specifically given to it in the articles of this Agreement, and shall
have the power to make recommendations to the City Council and to the
Town Board to improve cooperation and efficiency in carrying out the
intent of this Agreement, and to make recommendations for amendments
and supplements to this Agreement.
C
[B] The membership of said Board shall consist of one member from the City,
one member from the Town, and one member from the Volunteer Fire Department.
The member from the City shall be appointed by the City Council; the
member from the Town shall be appointed by the Town Board; and the member
from the Volunteer Fire Department shall be elected by the members of
the Volunteer Fire Department. .
[C] Said Board shall have two regular meetings each year. The first quarterly
meeting shall be hold on the first Tuesday in March of each year at
7:00 p.m. The second quarterly meeting shall be hold on the first Tuesday
of August of each year at 7:00 p.m., at the City Hall in the City of
Monticello, unless such Board fixes a different place for said mooting.
[D) In every calendar year prior to the month of March, the City Council
and the Town Board shall name the members to the Joint Advisory Fire
Board. In ovary calendar year prior to the month of March, the volunteer
firo departmant shall elect its member to the Joint Advisory Fire Board.
[E) Such members shall hold office from the first Tuesday in March until
the Picot Tuesday in March of the following year. If the City and Town
fail to make such appointment in a timely manner or the volunteer Fire
Department falls to elect its member, the previous incumbent shall continuo
In office until ouch successor is named.
[FI The Board may adopt rules and by-laws not inconsistent with this Agreement
for the purposo of carrying out their duties hereunder.
CM
0
ARTICLE III: Duties of Joint Advisory Fire Board
[A] The Joint Advisory Fire Board shall, with the aid and advice of the
Monticello Volunteer Fire Department, prepare a budget prior to September 1
of each year for the maintenance, operation and purchase of equipment
for the following year. Such recommendations shall be submitted to
the City Council and Town Board on or before September 1 of each year.
ARTICLE IV: Joint Operating Fire Department Account
[A]_ The City and the Town agree to annually, prior to the commencement of
each calendar year of this Contract, mutually approve the budget of
the operating expenses for the ensuing calendar year as may be recommended
by the Joint Advisory Fire Board.
[e] Contributions of the City and the Town shall be paid to the City Treasurer
of the City of Monticello who shall keep the same in a departmental
account to be known as the "Joint Operating Fire Account." The City
CCouncil for the City of Monticello shall approve all expenditures at
their regularly scheduled Council meetings. All other axpendituroo
for the purchase of supplies, maintenance, and equipment which were
not part of the operating budget shall be approved by both the City
Council and the Town Board before said expenditures arc made.
C
ARTICLE V: Contributiono to Joint Oparatinq Fire Account
[A] The City and Town shall jointly contribute to the Joint Operating Fire
Account for the maintenance, operation, and purchase of equipment of
the Volunteer Fire Department. The contribution by each party heroin
to the Joint operating Fire Account for each calendar year shall be
calculated according to the following formula, known as the "Fair Share
Formula":
Total Costa x (% of Total Una + % of Total Value) - Fair Share Coots
2
Sao Appendix "A" for definition of items used in Formula.
-J-
O
[B) The City and Town shall deposit in advance to the Joint Operating Fire
L` Account the quarterly contributions of the accepted budget for the Volunteer
Fire Department. Said quarterly contributions shall be made on February 1,
May I , August I , and November 1 in the year in which the budget was
approved. All contributions shall be made in money, and not in material
or equipment.
[C) Credit towards the quarterly contribution requirements for the following
year's budget shall be granted �n the basis of percentage contribution
for any balance remaining in the Joint Operating Account as of December 31
of any year.
ARTICLE VI: Revenue from Adjacent Areas
[A) Revenue from contracts for fire protection to adjacent aroam as mentioned
in Article I% (A] 3 and revenue from fire calla to those areas shall
be deposited in the Joint Operating Fire Account.
LARTICLE VII: Purchases
C
[A) The City Council and the Tovn Board shall jointly agree upon any expenditures
made for the purchase of additional fire—fighting capital equipment.
They shall agroo upon all specifications for any and all joint purchases
of capital equipment, pursuant to the recommandation of the, Joint Advisory
Fire Board. Pursuant to said specifications, the City Administrator
and the Town Clerk shall jointly issue a call for sealed bids to be
prepared and published. Said call shall refer to the apoctficationa
and to this Agreement as basic data binding upon each and ovary bidder.
The right to reject any and ell bids shall be reserved by either the
city council or the Town Board.
(D) At the time and place of opening bids, the City Administrator and the
Town Clerk shall tally the bids in the presence of the Joint Advisory
Firs Board. The Joint Advisory Fire Board shall make its recommendations
fID
0
to the City Council and to the Town Board as to either accepting or
KI rejecting the bid or bids. The City and Town shall not be bound unless
`- both the City Council and the Town Board accept the bid or bids. If
either the City Council or Town Board rejects a bid or bids, and either
Board deems the purchase of said capital equipment necessary, either
party may accept the bid and purchase and pay for the capital equipment
outside the agreement herein. Said property shall be the exclusive
property of the respective governmental unit.
C
[C) If both parties purchase the equipment jointly, the seller of such joint
equipment shall execute duplicate bills of sale revealing the interest
of the City and the Town so that each has a signed copy.
ARTICLE VIII: Maintenance of Apparatus
(A) The present fire -fighting equipment as sot out in Exhibit "A" shall
be that contribution of each respective governmental body. It shall
remain the sole and exclusive property of each of the respective governmental
unit. It shall be maintained and insured purauant to this agreement.
(B) The jointly purchased equipment shall be maintained and insured by the
agreement heroin. The control of the purchased equipment shall be retained
by the City and the Town.
[C) The cost of storage, maintenance, and insurance of the respective fire -fighting
equipment and the jointly purchaead Piro -lighting capital equipment
shall be paid out of the Joint Operating Fire Account.
[D] The coot of the maintenance and inouranco of the City Fire Hall shall
be paid out of the Joint Operating Fire Account.
ARTICLE IE: Use of Fire Equipment
(Al The equipment an sot out in Exhibit "A" and the equipment jointly purchased
ahall be used within the jurisdictional area of the City and Town and
nowhere also except as follows:
-5-
0
I . The ad jvc— L area where the fire may spread to such
City O= Town;
it. 2. To assist neighboring fire departments as may be mutually
agreed upon under a reciprocal agreement with such
fire departments;
3. In any adjacent area to the City and to the Town
with which a contract for protection may be negotiated .
[B] It shall be the duty of the Joint Advisory Board to provide volunteers
in sufficient number to maintain a staff of fire fighters to answer
fire calls and to command available equipment in such a manner so as
not to fall below the minimum standard set forth by the Bureau of Fire
Underwriters.
C
[C] Dispatching the operation of the Lira -fighting equipment shall be the
duty of the Chief of the Fire Department, and in the Chief's absence
shall be the duty of the Assistant Chief. If neither is available,
the person previously appointed for this purpose shall be in charge.
[D] The Volunteer Fire Department shall answer all calla under the direct i
Up ry inion of the Fire Chief without regard to the authority of any
other poroon giving the alarm or order -
ARTICLE X: Public Fmployeea' Retirement Association
[A] Requirements of the Public Employees' Retirement Association may be
paid by trannforring from the Joint Operating Fire Account as determined
by the Joint Advisory Board.
ARTICLE XI: Liobllity-Govornmental Functions-Protectivo Clauses
[A] In all Of the provisions of this Agroamant, the City and the Town shall
be doomed to be erorcieing their governmantal functions so that each
shall not be liable for the other for any nogllgenco of its ofricaro, 1
amployaoo, fire fighters, or agents.
[e] Specifically, without limiting tho affect of tho language in the preceding
-6-
o
C
paragraph, the City and its officers, employees, and fire fighters shall
not be liable for any of the following acts or omissions: failure to
answer a call promptly or at all; for any trespass or damage to persons
or property whether necessary or unnecessary in connection with going
to, returning from any fire call or in serving at any fire or fire call.
[C) In the event of any fire call to which the Fire Department will respond,
sufficient personnel and equipment shall remain at the City Fire Nall
in order to respond to any subsequent call for fire protection, whether
such call is or is not located within the same jurisdiction of the first
call.
ARTICLE XII: Life Of This Agreement
(A) This Agreement shall expire December 31, 1990, or at an earlier date
when, for sufficient cause, the City or Town shall notify the other
in writing at least 180 days of the desire to terminate the Agreement
herein.
[R) On any termination, the remaining capital equipment jointly acquired
shall be sold at a reasonable price on competitive bide and the proceeds
divided among the owners as their interest appears. Non -capital equipment,
such as miocalloneous supplies, office supplies, and perishables, shall
be considered the property of the Fire Department and shall be considered
to be conveyed, without further compensation, to the jurisdiction which
assumes the authority and responsibility for the Fire Department. A
schedule for all fixed assets purchased shall be maintained, and proceeds
from their sale ahall be diatributod on the basis of the original contribution
percentage for the fixed asset in quootion. The City and the Town,
respectively, may be the bidder at any ouch aalo.
(C) On any termination, the balance of any remaining monica in the Joint
Operating Account shall be distributed based on the percentage contribution
for that year.
-7-
0
1V TESTV-10= WHEREOF, L',-je par Lies of the Agreement have hereunto set
their hands and seals this LCL day of 1986.
TOWN OF M014TICELLoO CITY OF MONTICELLO
Chair Ma or
Cit A�j.j.tr
Town Clerk Cit Administrator
SEAL
-8-
SEAL
I
APPENDIX "A"
Total Costs: The total annual costs of Fire Department operation, in
dollars, including fixed costs, operating costs, manhour
costs, and capital costs amortized over expected life
of equipment, vehicles and buildings.
Total Use: The use of the Fire Department services by each party
expressed as a percentage (a) of the total use of Fire
Department services by all parties. The percentage (8)
is based on manhours spent in each area averaged over
the past five•(5) years.
Total Value: The Assessed Valuation of each party expressed as a percentage
(%) of the sum of the valuations of all parties using
Fire Department services.
Fair Share: Each party's share of total annual costs expressed in
dollars.
C
9
C
0
Example of Township's Share of Cost
With Market Value BeIng Used in Formula
PROPOSED NEW FA=R SHARE FORMULA
1989
Market Values
8 of Total
STEP I
City o f Monticello 3380,904 , 500
81.80%
Monticello Township 84,757,900
18.20%
TOTAL $465,662 , 400
100.00%
Fire Dept. Manhour
Salary Costs for Past
5 vrs by Location ( 85-89 1
% of Total
STEP II
City of Monticello $25,597
42.8%
Monticello Township 34,191
57.2%
TOTAL $59,788
100.0%
City
Township
STEP III
% of Market Value 81.8%
18.2%
% of Manhour Costs 42.8%
57.28
75.48
124.6%
Average of above % — 2
+ 2
Share of Total Costs 62.3%
37.7%
STEP IV
1991 Not Fire Department Costs to be Shared
$88,871.00
Montic ollo Township %
X 37.7%
ESTIMATED 1991 MONTICELLO TOWNSHIP COST
$33,504.36
C
0
0
Example of Township's Share of Cost
Using Gross Tax Capacity Value From Last Year
(This is Comparable to Assessed Valuations)
OLD FAIR SHARE FORMULA
1988
Tax Capacity Values
% of Total
STEP I
City of Monticello $15,405,139
89.2%
Monticello Township 1, 870,845
- 10.8%
'
TOTAL $17,275,984
100.08
Fire Dept. Manhour
Salary Costs for Past
5 vrs by Location (85-89)
% of Total
STEP II
City of Monticello $25,597
42.8%
Monticello Township 34,191
- 57.2%
TOTAL $59,788
100.08
City
Township
'=P III
% of Tax Capacity Value 89.2%
10.8%
L
of Manhour Costs 42.8%
57.2%
132.0%
68.0%
Average of above % .— 2
:L 2
Share of Total Costs 66.0%
34.0%
STEP IV
1991 Not Fire Department Costs to be Shared
$88,871.00
Monticello Township %
X 34.0%
ESTIMATED 1991 MONTICELLO TOWNSHIP COST
$30,216.14
0
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
7. Consideration of a resolution establishing an additional
deferred compensation plan for municipal employees. (R.W. )
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
In 1985, the City Council approved the establishment of a
deferred compensation program for City employees that allowed
individual employees to set aside a percentage of their own
wages into a future retirement account. The deferred
compensation plan was comprised entirely of 100% employee
contributions and did not require any City contribution.
Two plans were approved by the City Council , one being offered
by the International City Management Association Retirement
Corporation and a second plan offered by Safeco Insurance
Company through a local insurance agency. Currently, a number
of employees participate in the ICMA plan through payroll
deduction, and no one has utilized the Safeco Insurance Plan
at this point.
I was recently approached by Mr. Mike Gagnon, representing IDS
Financial Services, requesting that his organization also be
allowed to solicit deferred compensation programs for City
employees. While I do not know if there are any employees who
may be interested in a deferred compensation plan through IDS,
the City Council should establish by resolution the adding of
an additional plan before IDS representatives contact any City
employee.
The only obligation on the City's part by allowing another
vendor to solicit funds is that the City needs to establish a
payroll deduction authorization if anyone does participate
through IDS. As you can see from Mr. Gagnon's letter,
approximately 100 employees between the City of Buffalo and
Wright County do participate in their deferred compensation
program, and I believe there would be no problem in allowing
an additional vendor to provide this sorvico. It would give
our employees an additional choice; and, again, there is no
obligation or monetary roquiremont on the City's part if an
employee does participate.
B . ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
L Adopt a resolution adding IDS Financial Services as an
additional deforrod compensation plan for City omployees.
2 . Do not establish a third plan.
g0�
9 �� ��
L
C
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The establishment of deferred compensation plans for employees
is strictly voluntary. Currently, a number of employees do
participate in the ICMA retirement program as a supplement to
the state-sponsored PERA retirement system. The establishment
of a third plan creates no obligation on the City's part but
allows an employee an additional choice if they so desire to
begin a deferred compensation program. As a result, staff
recommends Council adopt the resolution, which is required in
order to achieve the tax exempt status required under tax laws
to allow an employee to defer compensation.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of resolution; Letter from IDS Services.
10
RESOLUTION 90 -
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING
AN ADDITIONAL DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Monticello has employees rendering valuable
services, and
WHEREAS, the establishment of a deferred compensation plan for such
employees will serve the interests of the City by enabling it to
provide reasonable retirement security for its employees, by
providing increased flexibility in its personnel management system,
and by assisting in the attraction and retention of competent
personnel, and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that the establishment of
additional deferred compensation plans would provide the
opportunity for the employees to make alternate selections, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to City Resolutions 1985 #3 and #4, the City has
established two deferred compensation plans to be administered by
the ICMA Retirement Corporation and Safeco Life Insurance Company,
and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that the establishment of a third
deferred compensation plan as offered by IDS Financial Services
Lwill also serve the above objectives, and
WHEREAS, the City desires that the investment of funds held under
its deferred compensation plan be administered by IDS Financial
Services for the purpose of representing the interests of the City
and its employees with respect to the collective investment of
funds hold under their deforred compensation plans:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY OF MONTICELLO adopts
the deferred compensation plan, attached hereto as Appendix A, and
appoints IDS Financial Services to serve as the investor of funds;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Administrator shall be the
coordinator for this program and shall receive necessary roports,
notices, etc., from the IDS Financial Services and shall submit all
necessary and required forms as required under appropriate law.
Admini strative duties to carry out the execution of the plan may be
assignod to appropriate departments.
Adopted this 10th day of Docember, 1990.
Mayor
City Administrator
O
C
IDS Financial Services Inc.
113 Locust
P. O. Box 175
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
Bus. (612)295.5024
(612)295-3275
Res. (612) 658-4751
October 25, 1990
ATI'ENrION: Rick WolfsteLler
Monticello City Administrator
250 Fast Broadway P.O. Box 1147
Monticello, MN 55362
Dear Rick,
Michael J. Gagnon
Personal Financial Planner
Thanks for taking the time out of your busy schedule to meet
with me to consider adding IDS as a vendor for the City Fmployee
Deferred Compensation Retirement Plan.
As you are aware, IDS is a Minnesota based company and has had local
representation here in Monticello for over 40 years. As a vendor
for the 457 Program, Dan Wickman and I are committed to a high level
of local service. Our home office has a very strong support system,
so answers to technical questions about the Deferred Compensation
Program are readily available.
As I mentioned in our lost conversation, IDS has been very active in
Buffalo as a vendor of this program. Unofficially, IDS has 40-5014
of the full-time Buffalo City Fmployees enrolled in the Deferred
Compensation plan. Between the City and County in Buffalo, IDS has
approximately 100 employees enrolled in our program.
We ask that you (along with the City Council) approve IDS as your
vendor. We can provide any documentation you may need and we would
be happy to attend a City Council meeting if necessary.
Again, thank you.
Sincerely,
Michael J. Gagnon
PC I Financ`al Planner
Dan Wickman
District Manager
D7
rr �
Plan for n rewarding retirement
Now you can offer your employees a %%my
topatticipate in a deferred compensation
plan that will help them save for
murding years of retirement.
The IDS 457 Deferred Compensation
Plan was developed to meet the unique
needs of governmental and tax-exempt
organizations You and your employees
can enjoy these benefits:
• salary deferral
• high qua]ity investments
• tmdeferred earnings
• easy payroll deduction
And, through voluntary participation,
your employees sharp the cost of this
plan.
What is a 457 deferred
compensation plan?
A 457 pl an allows your employees to
reduce a portion of their current taxable
income through salary deferml. The
deferrals and all earnings ire federally
tax deferred until distribution at
retirement or separation of ser vim All
plan omwts remain the property of the
employer.
O
I i . I I I b. 1 .1.1 ii 1 1 r 1
Our professionals go to work
for you
The success of any retirement plan
depends on employees understanding
their options and recognizing the value of
the plan. IDS helps make that happen
because of a network of more than 6.000
financial planners who serve tau million
clients nationwide. You can akays rely
on an IDS financial planner ta provide
professional services:
• present the 457 plan to employees
• describe the IDS available investments
• motivate employees to saw
• encourage employee participation
• help on with additional services,
like retirement planning and other
financial counseling
In addition to meeting with your
employees, your IDS financial planner
can provide you with materials to help
you promote and implement your 457
plan. Them materials include:
• sample plan document
• sample plan announcement letter
• sample participant election form
• sample designation of beneflriary form
• question and answer brochure for
employees
• federal tax saving worksheet
• poster and payroll stuffer
• ■ 1 ■ 1 n a u.. ■ ■
Investments to match financial
objectives
IDS ofFen a full range of investments
suitable for 457 plans You choose the
types of investments you aunt included
in your plan. Your employees then select
specific investments to match their goals
Choose from these investment
alternatives:
• Mutual FYanda
A vurietyof funds with investment
objectivesthat have differing powntials
for return and risk.
• Certificates.
Single payment or installment
certificates with periodically adjusted
rates of return.
• Annuitlea
Fixed and flexible contracts that feature
lifetime income and investment
opportunities
• Insurmnce.
A choice of policies that provide
protection and, in many cases, investment
opportunitiea
• • , � ��'�'
Financial Services to Meet
Why IDS?
m Employers Needs
IDisability
tncomo Plans
When you set up your deferred
Dder*ed Compensation, Plans
Financial and Estate Planning
-
compensation plan through IDS you've f
Qualil•ed Rotimment plans
chosen a leader. i
Croup Imnlrance
limlt.h Care Bendits
i
Founded in 1894. IDS Financial Services
Individual Retirement mounts
Inc, part of American Express, has
Porton! Deduction Servfm
Rrsnrml Financial Planning for Emplgecs
helped millions of Americans meet their
financial objectives 7bday, the IDS family
of companies own or manage assets
exceeding $36 billion. More than 6,000
-
financial planners sero every state in
the nation. The members of the IDS
group of companies manage more than
$2.5 billion in plan asset&
Talk to an IDS planner
-
A retirement plan should he flexible
enough to adjust to your company's
individual needs The IDS 457 Deferred
-
Compensation Plan was designed to do
just that. And, you and your employees
benefit from tho special attention
provided by an IDS personal financial
planner.
Plan today for rewarding retirement
years with a financial planning company
you can count an - IDS
IDS Financial Services Ina
IDS 7baer 10
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440
LOW
Aa AM.—Ew—moAN
...w....
O
o looms ms in�.ae.r ..um
rep
All n¢IrY nrwd
_
4017 A lam.
- -
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
B. Consideration of replacement of tractor mower/snowblower for
the parks department. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
A few years ago, the City purchased a Model 650, John Deere 4 -
wheel drive tractor with a 72 -inch mower (no snowblower) , from
Moon Motors which worked well in our parks department. Very
few problems were encountered with the tractor with the
exception of the mower deck, which had to be replaced sooner
than expected. Approximately three years ago, the City traded
off another tractor mower/blower combination unit, our Allis-
Chalmers, for our front -mounted Toro mower unit. It was
decided at that time that we could install a snowblower and a
cab on the 650 John Deere and use that as our primary
snowblowing piece of equipment for sidewalks and miscellaneous
cleanup.
This combination has been less than successful, however, as it
is underpowered with only 14.5 PTO horsepower, and this
coupled with a non -hydrostatic drive has made it an
Impractical unit for blowing snow from areas with any
significant accumulation of snow. During the first year we
used the snowblower on the tractor, we had to take the tractor
back to the factory -authorized dealer to tweak the horsepower
up to be able to blow any snow at all. The underpower
problems continue and we, therefore, felt it was time to
replace the 650 John Deere with something more suited to
blowing snow.
In addition, the parks department has been considering the
acquisition of an additional mower, as at times it has been
difficult to keep up with all the mowing in the City
properties. In preparation for this, it was felt that we
could purchase a heavy duty snowblower/mower unit with various
attachments for sidewalk maintenance and keep the John Deere
650, but limit it to mowing only with occasional backup as a
snowblower. An amount of $55,000 was requostocl and placed in
the 1991 budget.
Since that time, we have further investigated our needs and
the suitability of such a heavy duty, expensive pioco of
equipment to fill those noads. With Councilmember Blonigen's
assistance, we have determined that the cost of such a heavy
duty pioco of equipment for snowblowing with its limited
suitability for mowing operations limit its practicality for
the City of Monticello. Wo, therefore, have reassessed the
needs for 1991 and fool they would be bottor mot replacing the
650 John Deere with a larger, more powerful tractor which
could handle our snowblowing and mowing noads. We would than
/ look further into the consideration of purchasing an
additional mower such as the front-mountod Toro unit which the
City has.
lU
.f
i
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
A 955 John Deere 4 -wheel drive tractor, which has 27 PTo
horsepower, when equipped with a snowblower, 72 -inch mower,
cab, and broom, sells for in the area of $20,000. The trade-
in value of our 650 John Deere would expect to be
approximately $5,000; therefore, we expect the cost of the
replacement unit to be under $15,000. For the additional
mower such as a Toro, the cost would be approximately $12,000,
making the total 1991 budget needs $27,000 rather than
$55,000, a savings of $28,000. The City prefers the John
Deere due to experience with past units and parts and service
are available in Monticello• and nearby Rogers, Minnesota.
Although we would like the additional mower also included in
the 1991 budget, staff is considering methods to increase
productivity of the mowing crews, which may allow us to put
off the purchase of the additional mower at least for the near
future.
Because of the need to replace the existing mower/blower as
soon as possible, the City could consider an allowable
alternative to the bid process. That alternative would be to
rent the 955 John Deere for a period up to six months. John
Deere dealers such as Scharber Equipment in Elk River offer a
rental agreement where 1008 of the rental would apply toward
purchase for the first six months. The City of Anoka has
recommended this procedure, and other cities as well as school
districts use it. If at the and of the rental period from one
to six months the City is satisfied with the performance of
the piece of equipment, we could obtain bids or quotes on that
piece of equipment and similarly used pieces of equipment and
make a purchase at. that time. The purchase price of the
rental unit would be guaranteed at time of rent {see quote}.
The rent would be $1,032.15 per month, or $6,192.90 for the
six-month period should we choose to go that long.
During the time we are using the new tractor and checking it
out, City staff could further evaluate the need for additional
mowing equipment, the possibility of keeping the 650 John
Deere as a mowing unit only, or selling the 650 John Deere
versus trading it in. It appears that the existing John Deere
tractor and old broom attachment have a value of at least
$5,650 if traded in, maybe more if sold outright.
•Note: Moon Motors no longer sells the larger John Deere
tractors but offers parts and service.
12
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to approve the rental of
a new 955 John Deere tractor for a period of up to six
months at a rental cost of $1,032.15 per month with the
assumption that at the end of the rental period and
favorable use of the equipment the City will obtain
quotes or bids for the actual purchase of that piece of
equipment and one similar. Under this scenerio, the City
could obtain the new unit within 14 days.
2. The second alternative would be not to rent the 955 John
Deere but prepare specifications and advertise for bids
for comparable units. Bids could be returned and
considered at the January 14 meeting; and depending upon
the type of equipment and the lowest responsive bid, we
could obtain delivery in early or mid-February.
3. The third alternative would be not to consider replacing
the John Deere mower/snowblower with a larger tractor
unit but to again consider replacement with a unit
primarily considered for snowblowing such as the
Trackless MT and then consider another unit strictly for
mowing. This does not appear to be practical for the
r
City at this time and appears to be cost prohibitive.
4. The fourth alternative would be to do nothing at this
time and attempt to got by again this winter with the
existing equipment. We also have the option of
contracting out sidewalk snow clearing should we get into
heavy snow conditions.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director and Park
and Street Superintendent that the Council consider renting
the new John Deere 955 as outlined in alternative tl. We have
discussed this with the City Administrator, and he is
comfortable with the initial rent of the equipment with the
option to purchase by quotes or bids at the and of the rental
period. This option would allow staff to obtain a piece of
equipment with nearby parts and service that is demonstrated
to be Satisfactory in the past and would allow the greatest
flexibility when considering additional mowing equipment or
the trade or outright sale of the existing tractor.
SUPPORTING DATA:
Copies of information on existing tractor and quote on
replacement unit.
13
f l Customer Purchase Order for John Deere Equipment X 99390
l� l
( PURCHASER'S NAME 6 ADDRESS (First Sigrrer) I [M1E Or o,e[R GUMPANY Milt EATER 0AMR Iq [DDAIER ALCDUNI NO
ruNE p re. wme wr. trll I zz (6' 9 O
. cx c sEe n as No r l E., r.D wrw7fl uta lu euda No
(ZCONDI ff W Owr2a NAMCI SAIF BAIk
I1) 11
�I
UR R,1 SELLERS NAME 6 ADDRESS
lows 51A1[ iR CDDE •[��`
DUUNTV PULl1ASLfl A[&1 RQW N AKFI , _ J ri a S c,:
PURCHASER'S NAME A ADDRESS (Second Signer)
NAVE
EcWaills ADD PURCHASER :LAME TO MAIL LIST
SIRLETbRM pC�P'yIC�Ihe(CA�O'�npry�ane Dbo,) AO INDUSTftlALIeMN CEDE IIIAIEI [IP Indwtllral I UIT IJb BusiMLJF I ❑ I❑ 8860
I pNe), Ne urW¢ra,0nod, hereby dd@I Irom you VIa Egwp a ITCsCnbed blow, to be t1CWered as shown below, 1 his Order O subject ID yaa ab6sy to obtain Such
Eaw(Yn1eY Irom L' ",anulactura and you fl,aT be urMw n0 NabLty d E�4vory d the Epapmora B ddayetl a preveNed duo to labs dlurbances. trarepoitehon
dtIkI/SMs, or la arty rralaon heyrNK1 your weld. The oke st wn be1Ow h lAsbIEN7 to your raced d the Equlp,wnt pray to an)' charge 1n Imco by the ma ufacturer.
It m also subject Io any new a cnc,eased taxes 4npoW upon the sale d the EglapmDN ane, the We of this INdel.
CITY 7 EOUwe PMENT (OMndd. Ste a 0e60030n) - - _ ploM d 1U
We) PRODUCT IOENTWICA1N No ASH PFFD
CKLM PRIG[
_ 3n 9ss 14 Kyo-Valu` 3pt
I) o, 5 S(!�A %CIUI ........ ... _ a 4 1 1 v�`J
I T SAA
a-4, o,.,a.� — ......... ((•S
/ T 30 >vb SAaAa(�tn.[. Kra Pr.eC,�t _ Q•Jb..9 ._.._._.....- 335 w
as 4-Z
vt5
I (We) ala o,arAl. VruWlr, ruW gpllYey UIe 1 Aml(y ■ O PIKE toaW in,a a1 eeWely cl eIa •beua LguEnwr6, I —`
e s'tredl y to bs a141ed e,0rinr aIa emn pua. tLC16an(N fiA be kao 6rtldael d tl y aDaamn, llm6. I
yxl6rwMrMJ0�a1 Eq Yrn d 66f r tO�Q1/ Tharok6uw+9_r a ftl llm.na me, b s�w.aa �or qpm .u„_1 E. TbTAL CASH PRICE
01Y _ Of-TJffFq K)t Or I RADE IN rTN)DUCI TUENI aTCATION NO AMOMI
Zoe
it R Aa611 TVPE-IChKA Oral �Aler•atn
utiR1 P��.rwenerrwl e rii �awrecr.Ie Mrir lsle.CalxaP, e. TOAL -TRAOLALLOYMNN
Mem rj V S
Va
[l me1 s-BALANOE_—��p.
J
6_BALERTAR_",
CIN .m O[��MA�,
imn,n{�faWs�A LI /I Asa �"� e, W_6ToiAL
Eli
". ABH MITH ORDER 6r11e,urn Ir,+1 rlsneNi A, r nrr 6 umsvane tater Il M Meu.rl qrN pu1J' -
MARKET USE Jt7 A (W) Fa••Il. •1 2:Z'I Ap. -
A ebur• •/1'ene 4wlw,eAa
1 lierMrr 11tMyy JI Iluywyp TA IA,arrl` 1 U•r 4atMre• UUaly r�rryuwB
1 reap AR r»sii 7. 1 twFp 61/eq ( rrYN) y�yAyj '/ f Wa lM/R (1 6i l W M!e 6
14 wr 1 nNA`+rWI Ow" 7:t rMn••�,Yr1 'Sp, P���1�wAMtI - -- -.�, wW
71 IAae sswMy 6 AeAxban• �t;Rr Hee > !6 thrlle+ru ( III 1 1 el loft.•*
IMPORTANT WARRANTY NOTICis so kxlh on a�EE: The J0M1 Deme wTYlan w uranly b aP1At etre 10 new John Deme I1taDArtg6)1x 1y.1 here NA car�roywN/an! on IRed prerArcN Thm naw
D REMEDIES
PERTAININrG TOT S PURCHASE ARE LIMY EDal ceideale EAS SET FOecerAd l H IN THE WARRANTY CERTIFICATE ANDr�B CONTIiACf. IMPLIED WATS NRRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS ARE NOT MADE AND ARE EXCU)DED UNLESS SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED IN THE WARRANTY CERTIFICAIE.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I (We) have rocnvnd the r4liltAtali manual slid John Dame wlNlell warmly al>plceble p the newJohn Does IxOtl,a,t(A) bp,l,y (wlLllagad Arid UINIeI.aard
11 al my (Nur) 14is ora IxTWed as eel loth It1 on,
I (Wb) plonllae to pay the balance due (NM 7) a UMn &bcN, In Cash. Of la SM W@ a Tmr Sala AOreen," (RMM IndMknYx CAEAIad)• or a LZ.AT=
dahvviry a i e EEEjPI111Cp north, tdlMlaag Hanoniin the a" uu(so one chatgas d the llixeprq of
�Il0ishhetl d lha EawMnanl adxW hNBIn, Daapaa prymcal
R rhAAA
A(]IINeIIa By Iti+.... a..+...i.L., 1 .
a OM AM pled - - aelelmen A.i� 0%% 044 S Le,
lA'IMMIT ON WARw1/11 ef1a,A —I,- eAwLa,RV
IAA•"sAtAR PIR• a1Ma[e,IrrNN NI N1AIw lYAIfR(Mry
I ACKMONVLBDWMBNT 1, I I J
IX I]M11MnuA $11) naYtnuaAl
CUSTOMER COPY
y _ SPECIFICATIONS -CONTINUED
IE
Ess
Electrical System:
Type .......... . .......
12 "it
Buttery Size ................
47S Cold Cranking
Amps 0 – IVC
Alternator .................
40 Amp
Stanley Site ................
1.9 hp (1.4 kW)
Fuel System:
Type ....................
Direct injectimt
Injection Pi Type.. , ....... ,
In -Ilia; wlelectric
shmidr
GaMir at 75% IoW (mowing) .....
1.4
Urlse Tralnt
Transmission Type ............
Ilyinostatic-2•range
ft her of Speeds ............
infinite
Final Drise............ . ....
Planetary
,
Oraket ...................
Wet disk
• Sitering... . ...............
Power
IAawktr'nmgttc Weight Copxity...
gtiarib. 1365 kg)
Acte Capacity tin Operation)
1'rum. . .......... . .......
2MO Ib, (I 3W kg1
Rear ....... . ............
2(401b. ( J 2 kg)
Il)dreulle System
Type nr System...............
Open Center
Working Pressure ........... ..
2NN) psi (17240 kPa)
Pump rrype) ..... .. ...... I
Gcar
Pump Capscity .............. 17.2
gpms (0.451/a)
Cat. 1 7.14 Ilitch .............
tStatdaard)
Ibtch Li0 Capacity
At 24" Behind Usk Ends .......
957 lits. (474 kg)
Irh Control type . . ............
Position
11101
T)pe ................ .
Live indepctakto
Speed (no rpm at
1210 engine rpm)
Mid............. .....
21(1)
Rem. . ......... .I.
340
Clutch, .. ........ ... . ...
Hydraulic Multi Disk
)Snake ... ... ..........
ilydtaniicany ue-
milled
Fluid Capecll)ea:
Ftte1 Tank . . .............. .
6 6 pL 121 L)
Cooling System ..... .. .
4 qt (3 1 L)
Crankcase (with filter). ....
4 3 is. (4 1 L)
Trmnndsshat R Ilydrauik System
4 5 gal. (17 L(
From Axle Germa4e ....... . ,
2 6 ql. 12 3 Li
%%Fight (Includes fuel. oil, cotdant mini R•1
two, ... ...... . .... ...
«.
Nil WD. . . . .. . . ... ...
I I9W to. (901 kg)
4-
1114
C20-212-4
655, 755,855 and 955 Tractors
DIINENSIONS-955 TRACTOR
kL/
w SacUna, huaA, (D
INohaNaal From W~ Do—
Tires (Wheal Position): ........
I1146 (2 porifim)
36%13.30-15 (2 position)
Rear .. ..............................
Front ........ , .. • .. •
T•I2 42 position) on)
23a8.3iyt4 12 position)
Dimenaiaaa:
(mm) ............................... ...........
64
&1
(A)-WwlbUe-in.
116251
11625)
.,` t6)�'udl kapA wstk 3 -point Mtch- (mm)• .......................
110.3
110.3
(2800)
(2900)
ICIA�eni) width (rtsiadin. (—)...................... . ..........
50.2
(1275)
54.7
11389)
Oven4i width (mas)-im (mm) ..................................
58.9
61.0
(1496)
(IS49)
(Dptnside width (mint --in. (mm) ..................... ............
27
(686)
24.7
(627)
tnside wWdt (rtwl--im (mm) ................................
35.7
310
(907)
(797)
Height from itm+nd:
fop of hood- 4" (frim) ....................................
53 3
34.+
(E) -Th
(1330)
(1382)
(p).To top o1ROp'S-min.(mm)••................................
77.1
79.3
((;)•c;wur4 ckamnce, drawbar bracket nun) ............ .......
(1960)
10.9
(277)
(2014)
Ito
(279)
Wke) Trca& (ccntes—eattr):
Rcuwhrclr-m. (mml.,...., � ., .... �.......... ..... ..
336473
797-460
(991azt)I)
06.11
(laoe•)169)
Front Whcdrin. (aura) ..........
40 443.3
(10274153)
38 647.3
(981-120I)
7hmin8 radius: .......
With bra►esdl. (m) ............. . ................... .
8 0
6 0
(2 4)
(2 4)
Without bralra - n. (ml ......
68
(2 7)
t 9
(2.7)
:Subtract 19 -finches for I?Wtors "'$.past hitch.
RoR-Gard ROPS.fppforimately 6 inches with Special Nigh Roll Ofw d RAPS.
With Standard
t sahes to top of ROhaigpnd wuh as canopy.
Note: Add
w SacUna, huaA, (D
R
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
9. Consideration of Adopt -a -Street proqram terms and conditions.
(J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the last Council meeting, we briefly discussed the
Possibility of having an Adapt -a -Street program in the city of
Monticello. The consensus appeared to be favorable.
Consequently, I spoke with the City Attorney and obtained
information from MN/DOT regarding such a program. It appears
that MN/DOT has already done most of the legwork and has had
the program in place long enough to be able to determine
appropriate terms and conditions. It is suggested that we
incorporate those terms and conditions into our program where
applicable. In addition, the City Attorney suggested that we
obtain certificates of insurance when possible from organized
groups.
I have enclosed a modified version of MN/DOT's Adopt -a -Highway
terms and conditions for your review. There is no immediate
need to approve these conditions at this meeting; however, if
you find them acceptable, please feel free to approve them, ,
and we will begin working with some groups for programs for
the spring.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to adopt the terms and
conditions as presented, which closely align with
MN/DOT's program.
2. The second alternative would be to modify the terms and
conditions as so suggested by City Council.
3. The third alternative would be to do nothing at this
time.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
As Public Works Director, I fool that the program sot forth by
MN/DOT is acceptable and recommend adopting that program as
outlined in alternative 01.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the proposed Adupt-a-Streot terms and conditions.
14
11
C
4A
- CITY OF MONTICELLO
ADOPT -A -STREET TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1, The group agrees to pick up litter on a segment of otate highway selected
in consultation with the City of Monticello. Recommended length is one
mile. At the City of Monticello's discretion, certain streets may not be
eligible.
2. The group shal l roview the safety training materials before each pickup to
alert participants to the hazardo and precautions of working on a highway
right-of-way.
3. The group shall pick up litter during daylight hours only. Pickups may
not be allowed at certain times ouch so on er near holidays.
4. The group shall provide adequate superviolon to participants eighteen
years of ago or younger. unless specifically permitted, children oleven
or younger shall not participate.
5. Work shall be limited to the area between the outer shoulders and the
right-of-way boundary. Participants shall not pick up litter in any
median. Work may not be done on the roadway itself.
6. The group shall arrange litter pickup dale(o) in advance with the streot
suporintendent or his/her designee in the appropriate public works off leo.
The group shall obtain their supplies during regular buslness hours.
7. The group shall place filled troshbago on the shoulder slope cl000 to the
ditch bottom. The City will arrange to pick up the bags. Groupe are
encouraged to racyclo appropriate materials for their own benefit.
B. Borrowed or unused supplies shall be returned to the City public works
office within Ono -took.
THE CITY OF MONTICEI.LO AGREES TOt
1. Provide high violbi 1 ity vooto, traahbago, oafoty training materials, and
temporary traffic warning signs when necessary.
2. Arrange to remove filled traahbago from the adopted street.
3. Arrange to remove largo, heavy, or haaardoue material from the adopted
otroot.
4. Coordinate publicity with the group to solicit local media coverage.
5. Street signs may be erected only for groupo that agree to adopt a at -root
for a minimum of two years. The name on the aign shall be limited to two
lines of eighteen to twenty characters (including spaces). The City
r000rvos the right to approve and/or edit names or acronyms.
12
CITY OF MONTICELLO
ADOPT -A -STREET PERMIT
MON ICE1,1.0
(check one)
() Adopt-a-Stroot. The group agrees to pick up litter at least throe times a year for a
minimum of two years.
I Pick -a -Street. The group agrees to pick up litter one time only.
We request permission to pick up litter on
between
and
for a total of miles.
The City of Monticello reserves the right to refuse, cancel, or revise thin agreement if in
its sole judgment the nature of the group or its sign in political, controversial, or in
questionable taste, or if the group is not meeting the terms and conditions of thio
agreement. By signing this agreement, the group acknowledges the hazardous nature of the
work and agrees to comply with the terms and conditions herewith to the satisfaction of tho
City of Monticello.
Except for the negligent acto of the city, its agents and employees, the volunteers or their
agents shall assume all liability for, and save the City, its agents and employees, harmless
om any and all claims for damages, actions, or causes of action arising out of the work to
done heroin.
Any and all volunteers of the group or other persons while engaged In the performance of any
work or service performed under thio agreement shall not be considered employees of the City,
and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Worker's Compensation Act of
Minnesota on behalf of said employ000 or other persons while so engaged, and any and all
claims made by any third party of the group's volunteers or other persons while so engaged
on any of the work or services to be rendered shall in no way be the obligation or
responsibility of the City.
Name of group
(please print)
Name of group representative
Signature
Addreao
Phone (home) (work)
Name to appear
on
on sign
(IIIIIIIII11111111111111.�
Special provio!ona
city Representative
Cato
is
L -
L4
TRACKING FORM
Agreement Number:
Contract Date:
Group Name:
Group Type:
Group Leader
Last Name:
Street:
City:
County:
Senatorial District:
Legislative District:
Street Name:
Beginning Street Intersection:
Ending Street Intersection:
Description:
Adopt or Pick (A/P) :
Sign Name:
First Name:
State: zip:
Daytime Phone Number:
Sen Name:
Rep Name:
Length in Miles:
Certificate (date mailed to group):
Expiration/Re nowal Date: Renewed: Y/N
Pickup Dates # Bags Collocted # Participants # Person Hrs
TRACK.FRM: 12/7/90
n9
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
1
ie. Consideration of curb -side recyclinq program for plastics.
(J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As authorized by the City Council, a pilot recycling program
for plastics (mainly neck type plastic bottles and containers)
was conducted from July to October of this year. The pilot
program was split into two sections, 66 homes in the Meadow
Oak area were serviced with curb -side, and 81 homes in the
Country Club area utilized a drop-off area at the Pump -N -Munch
store in downtown Monticello. Each resident in the drop-off
study area was provided a key, and the containers were kept
locked to reduce the risk of contaminated materials and
increase the credibility of the study. It was felt if the
containers were left open, other city residents as well as
non -city residents may drop plastic off there during the study
period.
Curb -side Study
The study showed that in Meadow Oak with the curb -side
program, 264 of the residents placed plastic at curb -side at
almost every opportunity to do so. Another 204 recycled at
+. least once per month. The remaining 544 of the people
recycled plastic less than once per month. For the three-
month study period, 184.5 pounds of plastic was recovered from
the 66 curb -side homes. This is an average of 0.932 pounds
per house per month.
Drop-off Study
For the drop-off area, the amount of plastics recycled was
slightly higher with a total of 236.5 pounds recovered during
the same period from the 81 homes in the Country Club area.
This is an average of 0.973 pounds par house per month.
If we assume a curb -side average of 0.932 pounds per house per
month for the 1,327 single family units in Monticello and
approximately half that, or 0.460 pounds per apartment per
month for the apartments, which total 504, we would expect to
got 1,469 pounds of plastic per month. This amount times 12
months would give us 17,628 pounds per year or 8.8 tons. Ona
can expect the participation to grow in plastics; and city-
wide, I think we'll do better than the 8.8 tons. If we make
an assumption of 10 tons par year, we have a landfill
abatement savings of approximately $450. Along with our
county incentive funds of S10 per ton, we have a total
abatement or revenue of $550 per year.
is
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
After gathering this information, the recycling committee met
with Dave Foster of Polka Dot Recycling to look at our options
and possible costs. The cost of the pilot study ran near our
$500 estimate. Polka Dot's charges for the study were $455
total, and the cost for the locks and keys (which can be
reused at the compost facility) was $150. Dave indicated they
had enough information now to determine the most appropriate
pickup and handling method. As you may know, plastic bottles
are extremely difficult to handle due to its low weight and
extreme bulk. Dave often referred to it as handling air. It
appears the only way for Dave to keep costs for recycling
plastic low would be to co -mingle the plastic rather than to
separate out the various types of resins. This would lower
the market value of the plastic itself but saves an enormous
amount of time in the sorting process.
For Monticello, the curb -side program would be picked up on
the normal Thursdays by the current pickup units. Due to the
bulk, the plastic bottles would be placed in large canvass or
plastic bags on the recycling trailer. Once the bags are
full , the recycling trailer would drop the bags at strategic
points throughout the city for pickup by a larger unit from
Polka Dot. Based upon this scenerio, curb -aide recycling in
Monticello would cost S•30 per household per month for single
family units and $•20 per unit per month for apartment
buildings. Based upon this estimate, the cost would be
approximately $500 per month, or $6,000 per year. This would
be added to our current contract valued at approximately
$1,200 per month or $14,400 per year.
For the drop-off plastic recycling, Dave Indicates his cost
would be $•20 per household or apartmont per month. He would
establish a number of drop-off points at area businesses with
the cooperation of the City. Costs are not much cheaper for
the drop-off, as thoro is more risk for contamination of
products as well as the possibility for non -city residents
using the drop-off sites. In addition, handling costs are
similar. The approximate cost for tho drop-off program would
be $ 366 per month or $4,392 per year. This is $1,608 lower
than the cost of curb -side par year. Ovorall, this comes to
approximately $1.00 per household per year.
The recycling committee felt that for $1.00 difference, the
curb -side program was the way to go. If you stop to think
about it, you can't oven start your car and run it uptown for
$1.00. And while the drop-off program worked very wall for
the Country Club area, an open system may not be as trouble
free. It was also folt that most residents would willingly
pay $1.00 per year to have the convenience of curb-sido. in
16
t
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
all reality, with the current system, the additional cost that
would show up on the homeowner's yearly tax bill would be much
less than a dollar.
Dave Foster indicates that he could start curb -side recycling
of plastic in Monticello on January 3, which would be the
first normally scheduled pickup. Residents could place the
plastic containers in paper sacks at curb -side or in another
clearly marked reusable container. We would encourage
residents who recycle plastic to at least have one of their
regular bins at curb -side so they can receive credit. There
was some discussion by the committee about the possibility of
increasing the minimum participation required for full credit.
Currently, it is six units per quarter, which can be
accomplished by recycling only 1/3 of the time. The Council
may wish to consider increasing the requirements to nine
products per quarter. It was, however, felt that we should
have at least three months of an overall curb -side recycling
program in place before making that recommendation to the
Council.
For the apartments, the committee suggests that an additional
90 -gallon container be placed at each of the existing
recycling points and half the cost of the container be charged
to the apartment owners. This would be about $28. Cathy has
suggested that it be placed on only one utility bill rather
than spreading it out over a long period of time. If
approved, Information concerning plastics recycling would be
sent to all residents prior to Christmas, and we would
anticipate a smooth start up.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to authorize an amendment
to our existing contract with Polka Dot Recycling to
include curb -side recycling of plastics at a cost of $.30
c por household per month for single family and $.20 per
unit per month for apartment units at an estimated yearly
cost of $6,000. In addition, this alternative would pay
1 for 1/2 of the cost of the 90 -gallon containers for
7 plastic at the apartment sites with the program to begin
January 3, 1991.
The second alternative would be to consider drop-off of
plastic rather than curb -side at an expected annual cost
of $4,392.
The third alternative would be not to consider plastics
recycling at this time.
17
Council Agenda - 12/10/90
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the recycling committee consisting
of myself, Rick, Jeff, Cathy, Gary, and Dan that the City
approve alternative 01. in addition, at the end of the first
three months, it is recommended that the staff and City
Council examine the data and look at the possibility of
increasing the minimum participation requirements to nine
units per quarter.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of proposal from Polka Dot Recycling.
0
18
• • • • • •
• • • • • • •
POLKA DOT RECYCLING
P.O. BOX 462 (812) 6821305
SULO. MN 55313 (METRO) 477.6364
December 4, 1990
City of Monticello
250 E. Broadway
Monticello, MN. 55362
Subject: Curbside plastic recycling pick up for the City of
Monticello. This plastics quote is in addition to
the contract Polka Dot Recycling now has with the
city of Monticello for the pick up of recycleable
materials other than plastic.
1. Polka Dot Recycling, 205 Centennial Drive, PO Box 462,
Buffalo, MN. 55313. Contact person Dave Foster, submits
the following quote for curbside plastic recycling pick up
for the City of Monticello.
2. The monthly charge to pick up recyr_leable plastics will be
304' per household and 204' per apartment unit, per month.
3. Collection dnys will remain the same. The pick up of:
plastics would be effective .Jnnunr.y 1, 1991 through July
1, 1992.
If you have any questions, feel free to call us at 477-6384
or 682-1305.
Thank
You,
U v� Fostor
/�C� G lye.✓
Polka
Dot Rocycling
CDDF:alb
J
21
CITY OF MONTICELLO
•.
RECYCLING SUMMARY
July through
September 1990
1,900 Households, Eat. Pop.
4,919
MONTHLY TONS RECYCLED
Material
JULY
AUG
SEPT
Total For 3 Months
Glas8
6.85
9.76
7.30
23.91
Cans
2.27
3.31
2.74
8.32
Newspaper
26.00
34.01
22.74
82.75
Cardboard
0.60
1.37
1.00
2.97
Lead Batteries
0.07
0.04
0.02
0.13
Plastics
0.01
0.07
0.06
0.14
TOTALS
35.80
48.56
33.86
118.22 TOTAL TONS
Pounds/
37.68
51.12
35.64
41•.48 AVE. LBS.
Household/
Month
Total or Average
Tons MSW
149.98
150.71
129.55
430.24 TOTAL TONS
Landfilled
Cubic Yds
396.5
395
350
1, 141.5 TL. CU. YDS.
Landfilled
8 Total
19.3
24.4
20.7
21.5.8 AVERAGE
Waste
Recycled
by Weight
Ave. Monthly
74.40
77.57
74.95
75.648 AVERAGE
Participation
MONTHLY
Rate
Tons Elig.
35.73
48.52
33.84
118.09 TOTAL TONS
for County
Incentive
Funding
21
RRC FINeNCIAL SYSTEM
11/28/90 08:4?:13
WARRANT OATF- VENOOC
GCNERAI. CHF.CKiNG
Oi"urs.ment Jou'rnsl
OESCe•iPl'ION AMOUNT CLAIM IN`.
30050
11/71/90
BUSINESS RECOPOS COR
27
CORRECT COOING 3.794.10CR
30650
11/71/90
BUSINESS RECOOOS COP
27
CORRECT CODING 3.794.+0
0.00
-CHECK TOT/
30750
It /21/90
MONTICELLO FIRF DEPA
135
FIREMEN'S WA13ES 1.799.00
30750
11/11/90
M4r+TICELL0 FIRE OEPA
135
MEDICARE W/H 7.65CR
'1.791.35
-CHECK TOT,
:0751
1,/?1190
PEPA w re 3NS5
?74
IN5 PPEMLUM/H.FiTCH 54.00
30752
11/21/90
WRIGHT COUNT'? STATE
222
MEDICARE W/H FIREMEN WG 8.72
30752
11/?1/90
WPLOHT COUNTY STATE
222
MEDICARE W/H FIP.EMEN Ion, 8.72
17.44
OCHECK TOT'
34753
11/21/90
MN 4EP4RT nF NATURAL
118
''dATERCRAFT/SNO'd/4TY R 263.0•?
30754
11/71/90
SMITH &. NAVES
194
PROF SER/MARTiES FARM 24.00
30754
11/21/90
SMITH 11 HAVES
194
MISC LEGAL FEES 630.10
30754
11 /21 /90
SM I TM & HAVES
194
PROF SER/7TH ST & VMAR 32.00
34754
11/21/70
SMITH 6 NAVES
194
PROF SEP./ECONOMIC OEV 514.91
30754
11/71+90
'SMITM & HAVES
194
PROF SEP/4ANC18ERG EAST 04.00
1.265.01
-CHECK I-.
30755
11/77/90
ADOPT -A -DEI
4
ANIMAL CONTROL AOOPTI 528.00
1
30756 11/27/90 AMERICAN ENGINEERING 379 SOIL BORINGS/MISS (111.551.25 !
30757 11/27/90/ ANDERSON & A550' -TATE 10 HANDICAPPED SIGNS 315.22
30756 11/27/90 ANDFRSCN/GAR+ 11 MILEAGE E0ENSE 97.2?
30759 11/27/90 ANNr.NOALE VETERINARY 362 ANIMAL CONTROL SEuVICE 32.00
30760 11/27/90 ARA CORY REFRESHMENT 406 MISC SUPPLIES/CITY HAL 93.50
30761 11/77/90 6LTIER/ART .90101 REIM6/PRESSURE REO vf1 25.00
3076: 11/?T/70 PF W_" 'r+rEOPGE .00099 RECYCLIN, P4.I2E 100.01
30763 11/:S,i,7 6;iS7CS0•r CONSTRUCTI 435 ORATNAGf/CHE,SEA RO 1.040.00
30)64 11/27/-,v rlAHL'3REN SHAAOLOW AN 45 MISC PROF SE&VICES 656.20
a.. r+•. 11/;7+nn o�RA^T OF INSPECT SE .90103 MEM6E01iH1P ODES/r,APV A
3076* 11/77/71) E L MARKETING h15 ELECTION 6ALLOTS. f 1.S50.30
30767 11/77/90 ENNIS CAEIINETS/JIM 54 NEW RECEPTION Of SK 647.00 L
c
F3PC F3Nr.NCIAL SYS.TEN,
II/29/90 09:47:1?
HA P.A AN TOAIE VF •tpryp
GENE;AL CHECKING
?076? 11/?7190 FI_ IfiE0-S T.V. D. A:•D
30769 tt/?7/90 :V1. D=•AP
30770 1 1/27 /90 GE NERAL DENTAL CENT(
30771 11/77/90 GL ASS HL1T/THE
30772 11/?7/90 GkIEFNO«• SHEET METAL
30773 11/?7/90 HOLIDAY CREDIT OFFIC
30774 11/27/90 HOLMES & GRAVEN
30775 11/77/90 LIEFF,RT TRUCKING
30776 11/77/90 LOCATOR & MONITOR SA
30777 11/27/90 M d J CONSTRUCTION
30779 1IM/90 MIO CENTRAL. INC.
30779 11/77/90 MN STATE FIRE DEPART
30780 11/77/90 M17SIL
30780 1t/?7/90 ',•-•?iI.
?':790 ++I?719^ M•?3P.
30791 11/71/90 MrDsTICELLO ANIMAL CO
30787 11/77/90 O.E.E. BI+SINESS FOAM
30703 11/71/90 4 --JP DESIGNS
30184 11/21/90 PHILLIPS 66 COMPANY
30705 1 1/77 /90 RE5l$TRAR
30706 11/77/90 ROAD MACHINERY 0 SUP
30707 11/77/90 ROAD RESCUE. INC.
30708 11/71/90 SCHVAR?/PAT
30709 11/71/90 SHVMAN/CATHY
30190 11/27/90 SLMDNSON LUMBER COMP
30790 11/71/90 SIM6NSON LUMBER C,OMo
Di ittlrge—?nt .lournaI
F1EgrRIcTIgN AM•:QNT •.LA'
60 - IPE KIT/STPF ET FIE OT 1.99
67 PEI••k/SiJEWAt.K PkO.JcC 160.?9
64 HAMMER ORAL/SHOP & 6A 1?.95
66 NEW WINDOW/LOADER 130.46
73 REPAIRS/SEN CIT CENTER 34 .Ori
65 GAS/FIRE DEPARTMENT 121.53
96 PROF SER/TAPPER. PRO) 28.60
3150 FREIGHT CHCSIFIRE C1EPT ?0.00
434 EOUIO REPAIRS/SEWER CO 74.50
438 REPAIR ROOF/CITY HALL 35.00
113 SMALL TOOLS/FIRE DEPT 3?8.Ori
432 CONE A SCHOOLS/J. +FEIN 90.00
131 GAS/STREET DEPT 1711
131 GAS/WATER DEPT?.15
1)I GAS/SEVE2 COLI 73.15
321,.95
185 ANIMAL CONTROL CONTRA 018.75
158 1:OPY PAPEP 100.05
436 DECALS/F IRE DEPT 01.75
167 GAS/STREET DEPT 18.37
.9010? REG FEE/GAPY ANDERSON 90.00
182 BUCKET RENTAL//MAS L1 785.00
183 SMALL EQUIP/FIRE DEPT 337.77
.90006 TREE REPLACEMENT 30. DD
191 MILEAGE OPENSE 100.4+
103 MISC SUPPLIES/WATER OF 69.05
193 MISC SUPPLIES/STREET 0 71.95
99.00
•CHE':K TOT.
I
ICHECN TOf•
i
BRC FINANCIAL SVSTE�
11/28/90 08:42:13
WARRANT DATE L'f Nr,"'"
GENERAL CHECKING
30791 11/27/90 SPO TNGSTE0. INCOPPOP
30791 11/27/90 SPR INGSTEO. TNCOPPOR
30791 11/27/90 SPRINGST'E0. INCORPOR
30792 11/27/90 STEPHENS-PECV... INC
30793 11/27/90 SrLIvoF/CHAP1.gc
3079x. 1.1/27/90 T.XpO
30794 11/27/90 WRV-7VIST PAPEP COMP
30795 11/27i9O T11PN01iIST P6PEP COMP
34796 CCF
GENERAL CHECKING
14
5
C}
01 sburs.lr.nt Jour.1.31
OESC2IPTIC-N AMgUNT CLAIM TN'
307 PROF SE/REMMELE PRO 6.225.99
307 PROF SER/TAPPER OPO 5.303.52
307 PROF SER/SANDSEPG E 8.015.50
19.545.11
398 SUBSCRIPTION/OEP REGIS 39.00
90100 RECYCLING PRIZE $0.00
393 MiSC S1JPP/STREET DEPT 287.03
208 COP'+ PAPER 63.00
708 MISC SUPPLIES/CITv MAL 53.05
116.05
438 GAS POWERED SAW/;IPE 213.00
TOTAL 33.823.91
,CHECK Tor; -
IA
N
ERC FINANCr AL SYSTEM
12/06/90 08:40:13
DisbAjrSeM,?nt j0urtl,%)
Vit."RANI 0A TE VET, C': c.
f.E S,: C' I c T74:7 AM.).; rJ T
LA-`;] 1W,
GENE PAI. CHECKINC.
?9993 11/? nls0 E%9,:-TYZ S 1?;.:
14 CORRE('r vFtjo.->p 27.37
2909? 1 rN; I
()A C -)P4 r
TQ1,
3069? 1 1 3 .219 1) Ifir'.-CI
21 V-IDE
30750 1 1/3 Ol!) Q T I,.EttJ =I kE 0E PA
135 ADJUST MEDICARE W/H I f) 7..
30761 11/36/+:10 F?. I r ? F 0 /., c
.90soi CC.c.c;,:r CnOj,jG +5. C. n .-
16 1 1 113 <1/90 e.1 ','?E ;l/ APT
.90 10 1 r ((.,a )JIG 2$ -) 0
0. 00
-CHECK rn-f.
30787 11/30/90 POACI RESCUE. INC
193 coPREcr COOING 33 2. 27CR
30787 11/3 ()/?O P -)A0 PE S-:1JE Tu.'
183 CORPVCT 27
0. () 0
ICHECV rr't:
30197 11/30/90 U.3. POSTMAST Eq
210 POSTAGE/SEW 8A WAT SIL 143. 54
30797 1 1/2k 0/90 U.S. POSTMASTER
210 POSTAGE/SEW & WAT BTL 1&3.53
287. 07
---HECK Thr:
30798 11/? 0190 U.S. POSTMA$V(P
?10 POSTAGE 1,000. 00
30199 11/30/90 MN nEPAPT OF NATURAL
118 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 358. 00
30P00 11/3 0/90 M-4 OJPAPT OF NATUPAL,
110 WATEA':WeAFT/SfJOW/ATV r, 116. 00
30ecil it/30/n;. 0.'iP;0w .;.%,) (Tl%TI.-.-j
42 GARBAGE CONTOACT P 17
301101 1 1 1 iANITATT01;
42 SALES TA's 7?1.. 65
12.018. 02
-CHECK
TOTAL 14.737. 02
N
RRC fINAr:�'iAl SV`.1'£.•',
1'2/06/90 ',8: 39: 68
4:AP=•ANT •?CTE VEr::,.jo
3£NERAL CHECKING
3084? ,?/05/90 C:LIM.) THEATER
30803 19/0$/90 L1.S. POSTMASTER
30864 1?/05/90 M'+ OEPT OF TRAOE b E
30805 12/05/90 MN DEPART ^f NATURAL
30806 17/05/90 MN C.!oART OF NATURAL
30807 12/07/90 AMERICAN ENGINEERING
30808 12/07/90 6AF•CO F'RC•OUCTS. INC.
30809 12/07/00 rFa;:STF'•h•5
30010 1?/07/90 BIF:S. Irt.:.
30811 12/.)7/90 60[OdF.W.1rER TELFPHC•N
34F 11 li •?7/?., AG)h.j j•df.T :t' TSI A:iri)n
:.311 17/N /an rP:•,ect:t• T;Lg:HC•N
if) P11 I:/')?/?0 :IO.::a:rcc • rkjC.1)1:
30811 17/07/70 AC' IOC•EWAtEP Te LEPHpN
30811 12/07/•?9 OC IOGEWATER TELE PHOT+
30911 12/07/90 BRJ6GEWATER TELEPHON
3pt+1 :
,.C•7/Sn g:tj.,?uCTEF, 7FLECW•Y7
308,1 ,? 0,fIA ;-;'I>AjWATFQ rE1.E✓.+GN
30811 17/Pl/90 ':C TO•;EWATEP TELiPHO'+
3001 12/07/90 9RICIO EWArER rELEPHON
3081, 17/07/90 OPTiriEWATER TELEPHON
30811 17/07/90 ORIO'iFWArER TELEPHON
30611 17/07/90 OR I P';EWATER TELE PHON
30917 17/07./90 elUlrCALO STTU7MINOUS.
30813 12/01/90 OUSINESS RECOROS COR
90014
,^/O1/90 •:c-�r TO COAST
30574
17/07/9n C"'AIr TO COAST
30814
17/01/90 C^A';T TO COAST
30814
12/07/90 ''HAST TO COAST
30314
17/47/90 COAST TO COAST
aOR, 14
„/0)/90 rn 1?r T.) ;-Mir
?1)!17.
12r97/'+4 ��,d4- Til (:nAyT
'•0^th
1l JO7/9A '•Y;1 rt, C04ST
30016
12 r47 r'.7 rnt!T TO COAST
?0ItIrr
12 /07/9L, rA�T TO COAST
30914
11.(1+9•) .'''•e!T TO COO ST
lot. 11.
.T r07. Ar. e.,. 1,$, TO CC&AT
C
'Olsbs.rselntnt JOur.,a1
A:-)Ur+T .LATX Lr•
90104 M?MBERSHIP/LIE:P.APV 660.00
1.10 POSTAGE ;FFS 60.00
399 PEG FEE/OLLIE K/STAR, C 30.00
118 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 145.00
lie WATEPCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 3$9.O4
379 ENG SER/SANOE.ERG EAST 914:00
236 SNOW PLOW BLADES 47,.77
441 M,%C•E/PAPK (LEPT 1.00
395 LATRINE RENTAL/PAP�:S 02.00
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES
$90.27
24 TELE DwnptE Cie D.jnl
4c•C, �.
?4 TFl_. t•H"NE "NAPGrr,
6G, ;r
1L 1'clE7wC•v! rNo^GE'i
91.8(1
24 TEL ECHC•NE'CHARGES
56.30
24 TELEPHO•tE CHARGES
95.19
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES
20.00
24 TELEPH•)'1E rwA-f•ES
13.=�^
21. TFLf0Hn7+E CHARGES
24 T6tEPHO.'tE CHARGES
20.00
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES
37.10
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES
47.79
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES
15.00
24 TELEPHONE. CHa RGES
1r,74
1.o9S.51
25 CLASS V/STREET OEPS
91.00
27 FINAL PAYMENT/COMPU 2.529•40
35 MISC SUP/STREET LTGHT'p
7^.5`
35 MISC SUP/PARK C•EPT
13.:F
35 WATER MTC SUPPLIES
00.85
35 MISC SUP/STREET OEPr
e.7e
35 VEHICLE REPAIRS/STPEETS
0.3C
35 MIST: SIJP/WArFP DEPT
14.1x,
?5 EOU1= PERAIC' Pa+TS/!EW
35 MIS" OPERATING E•JP/!EW
71.30
3S SLD REPAIR SUP/PAP1, Oe
$9.11
35 SLO QEPAIR SUP/CITY HA
14.39
35 WISC SUPPLIES/SNOW i
T 20.94
3} T.:-O.S/SNGW ♦ I"e
35.01
r�NF.CK T4I-,
_'_ ___
_.� _;iii
��._ �' _ '��_
- - -
- - -•_ - _ __
(l
� _ li i
7
F,I H
AMCI0,1•-ISYS,TEN
_. 12/08'/90,
15:'38;68 ", ..,� �� �,,
���`OiTsbu�mrqent Journal
.
WARRANT,
"GENFRAI_,_CHECKINf,
OA1,E
VE HOOD
6ES_CR7Fa-LON AMG!MT
309tH
11/01/90
OAT
COASTTO. CS
35
CLOTHING SUP/,PAFIK,DEPT. 3:59
30916
12/011in0
.COASa fp COI">T
35
700:�5%5xor- :� '3A.a F 159.'43
30
t?
COAST Tn' 1:0c:3T
35
r?IS^ S17P/S+:•P E•: GA.'a.;E 91;26
• 309.17.
t?/07,•,2
COAST -r C4.:S T
35-
0 0 =:c PAS PS/ 'C14CI:- ;;AQ It(. 56o-
30816
1? ✓I)7/ 90
COAST h), 1;00,ST
35
CLEANING. SLIP/L IERARY3':S8
891.22
-CHECK TO
30315
1?/ri7'i:34
..•:IS11) TA ..:VISI
67
OO"%'!YE;• s•e,Ir:T r.GPEFr ??L.00
.
3i}016
t)✓�O'%'c'
_I -'j'; l: 1.1C :9
6?
Mi L:Y:•';: J S: /^A •a 7•I .7
?95 t6
t?/f;7i
T'1/FAcEtJ
LP
MISC ElPE!1SF/E!fC.TI9N'i 1:fO
30°:6
1?/07-/00
OO r7/N,5:,EJ
68
MISC TPAVEL. EYPENSE ?0:50
07.f.5'
•tiMEC•' T•'
30917
1? /0190
ppccc 5 t/axEr rn^F. 5
60.SlIP/REurA1.
OUSE *.'.;?D ?t.E4
30818
1?/07/30
ELM RESFARC`+ IN57ITU
662
ODES/SHADE TREE FUND ,212.99
30819
12/07/90
ENNTS CABINET$/JIM
56
BOOKCASE/LIBRARY 296.00
30820
1_>!fY/?n
FLI{fE+'S 1'.V.,.<.. A,Po
60
INTERf.O�-/Sme)P 6 GAFA;E R9.4:a
30821
12/01/00
GARTNER'S OFFICE PRO
311-
SUPPLIES/ECON DEVELOP' 62.68
'
30872
1. ?-/01/99
",VIERAL FIRF EOUIPME
66,3'
LITE BOXES/FIRE OEPT 176.85
3092?
17 /07/ 90
N,%oo7 .S AVTt SUPPL'I
18
E9ViP REP c•ARrS/SrP•FE
300$3
t: 1/1')
01'
H!t'P.Y'S AUTO S!IPPL,V
18
NIST SU:'PL7£S/Sti')P P,'!'."00.35
30823
1?•✓07/9n
NAPPY'S AVrO SV?PLS/"
78
V(y RF.PATRS/STREETS 2?1, TO
30873
11/0).90
H6RPY:S AUTO SUPPL.i"
18
MISC.' SUP/STREET Ll',MTS. ?5.00
30873
1x/02L?0
HA9Q.Y S AUTO SUPL
78
E9U1P PAPTS/SEWER DEPT S.55
3,0,,_!3
1?"1971=CD.'NA`;F`'S
0 'sjc-.�',
10
VEH,I-LE P,AP1'S/.PIPE Q9-7
308:
'101 ""Do
HEEMES/JERRv
81
JANTTOPIAL. SERvICE5!L,
30874-
i,: /O7,tr ?_d
Hv.
�1'._„Upy� 8U5 G01dRe:1Y
_. ._ F
A2,
Vf1+ICLE ?E PAIRS/,gTocET 11.(.2
_
. ��:�1,i
I'� ✓.06,� {,Ij
'.. n.)t rIJNO TPCr]•j POPT�Y �.I
0L
"f'.US TPOf15D +', r•fIYP L'',T 6,?9f :?R
a0S:27
i2'J01, SO
I Ii.�ES A GR.a /EN
Be
G.O. BOND FEES/SAND 2.050.00
” 06'? Z'
7''"07i13ri
H•}1NE5 6 59AVEN
60
G'.O.B')NO FFFS/PFMrq 1.101.00
A vPa•{EN
B6
G.O. 1!040 FEES/TAPPER 96?.00
308^8
12/01/00
J M OIL COMPANY
05
OIL/STREET OEPT 4!6.04=
30828
t" ?/07/00
J(jHNSON/NORMAN A.
.90105
MINERAL FLUID/FIRE OfP 87.1;5
f
E:'R.; FINA::I:I'4L SVSTEM
?tOSJ9ri AS
I
30?30 1:J01tgn Ls/cAC'St/,/n-:N
37177:0 7.101/!10 t,ti✓1�,"fi/.!r'hu
34'?;0 s2t07r•?r.. t;•.q.;�l.J�vN
30837 17/07/90 MANI)ow£R. IrJC.
30P37 1?/07/90 Mt.67'TE'S TAR- .ERVIC
30033 12/07/90 MAUS FO005
30033 1?/07/90 MAUS Fri00S
30833 12/07/00 MAUS F0005
30P33 1?/07/90 MA. -ii ;0)OS
30333 12/07/n0 •+47.15 c<•.�{•S
30T?3 1?/OIIV) a41J F.>r,,CS
30833 12/07/90 MAUS 940OS
30PS3 17/07/9'3 MAUS F00')S
30913 17/07/90 MAUS 1:000S
30834 +7/07/130 +1^vE4r ,AF, r,Ot1PANV
3603:. 17/07/90 wtO;:ST
CNS CCMPAN'/
30*?4 :rr}7ton M '•ti:E$T ,eS COMyANV
�`[j+ ?nF?h 1:/91•,0 M+i.y r<•: :AC: ..`v: ANY
i' 30$:74 i'•'rlt. '?f •r irllF ST Tit `= .•?ANt'
30E13h ;/0•r+1n n.t }iJ5<,T I:7Q "JMY?:!'t
3/!034 IJJ07/9rt :+l'•; 11E ST OAS '.rjMPAPfV
30$34 12/07/00 MIDWEST GAS COMPANq
30335 12/0700 VCHT-10ELL0 afJ'InAL C0
30916 17/01/90 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR
308315 17/,07/00 klnWriCELLO OrFTCE PR
30836 1;1/07/AO MCINTMELLO OFFICE QR
30036 17/01190 N.'?NTIct;LLD OFFICE o0
30837 17/07/00 MGNTTCELLO TIMES
30037 17/07190 M'ivTT,^ELIO TIMES
30$37 12/07/90 MONTtCELLO TIMES
30x,37 17/07%90 M:HTiCELlO 1rME9
30937 12/07/00 M.;'JrICELLti T1 ES
30$78 17/p7"10 "'�'!TT':ELLO TCAuNgNtP
C
.Oisoursen4nt „10Urnal
OEaC;°TPT.T.}c A,M••,szrsr t'.%&,! 4, I
3?7 MILEAGE EYVErJSE 9.03
?27 mi:.1:w EYoEN$E 9.70
377 MILE.+•?? E)PENSE ?.70
377 MILEAGE ElPENS£ :9.99
53.17
440 TEMP SERVICES/DATA PR 336.77
107 MISC SUPPLLEStSTR££T C ?5.50
108 MISC SUPPLIES/SEWER 12.05
108 MT, SUPPLIESJVATER 7.27
108 MIS SUPPLIES/ELECTIO.,jS 1.6$
10S CLEANTNG 517P/ANIM6,,L CO 3?.PO
109 CLEAtJltJG 5U='tCtT't IiA1,L ?.•t ii
103 MISC $UP/iM0P 8 GARt.,;S 14.97
708 9ATTEPTES/RECYCLING 23.19
708 MSIC $UOOLIES/CITV HCl 10.61
746 MISC. SUP/ECi•r2 DEVELC7P 17.99
703 C'•Ee:1Tr:•3 SU•'/LTBRAR ?.99
115 UTILITIES 300.11
119 UTILITIES 1'3.09
115 UTILITIES 44.71
115 VTT••:TI?5 >,01
115 U1'14ITI°S 7fi.4't
119 UTT'.ITIE$
115 UTILITIES 7.94
115 UTILITIES 303,61
1.309.79
185 AN144L tnNrPOL r.�nTt;1 ',R3,7}
130 OFFLCE SUPPLIES/PART'S 1.39
136 COPY PAPER/CITV HALL 61.59
130 OFFICE SHELVES/PLAN/ZO 78.25
138 09910E SUPP',tFStC HA,. 721.19
7?7.45
160 810$ A INFO/$US TRANS 866.99
160 LEGAL PU8 i OROINAUCE $66.48
160 GEN INFO/8LO PEPMITS $2.PO
140 sNOr' OI•,}vTTNG IWO 89.65
160 LEGAL 01JE4/PLArJ 6 IC'NltJ 73.5'
1.701.?b
x09 20 HALF OAA PAVME 13.150.00
'C:+EC1' 11,
:yECV TC
.r HF[♦ T,;
-BPC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
12/x8770 1S':; 38:48
)Wsburserient
jourpal
VAPPANT
C1 ATE
VEr:00f
9SSCP IPTI,1•7
Ati%;rlNl'
CL•� Ir
UtJERAI. CHECKING
30339
17f07/90
MONTICEiLO VAC1!1)M CE
11-1
CLEArJ SUF'/LTBP.AkY
1?.00
30°40
12/07/90
NaTI0NA1. 11USIII:�C+ P4P•
144
SU PP! IES /37PEETS
1.3'
3001.0
1?/071.30
Nr.TIONAI EMiNTr7, PAP
ILL
SVP PL IES/F1U OE"T
3.49
10.01
'CHECV t---
-:30841
3086 1
1?/ 07/90
NELSO'l OIL COMPANY
146
OIL &. LUBRICANTS/STRE
179.30
3054;
1?/01/90
w;4 r4:P'+ 1-9,1-':.. INC,
u.7
SUPPLIES/F ICE 03DT
+?.50
3QP,4?
1i/07f 90
N.?C•TWt P:j STATES PO«E
148
UTILITIES (.
Tj rjj .5r,
30843
1'/01/00
NOk THE A11 STATE POWE
148
UTIL LTIE S
ISL.')?
3OeL3
1^-1)7/•?13
(.1'-PIHEP'N STATF5 00'.'E
11-0
IJILTTIS 7.)?2.15
3084?
1?/17/)0
HAC'T:4;:•J i-ATES P_..:;
148
pTILTTIS=
t4 .57
jf•'-4?
'.)7/ 0f-
r..jC•T1:PN arATE S C --%'T
lye
4T IL TTIE`.
Lr,'? .0
3O8s3
1?: nljr,n
NnarvE•`a ST5,YzS vQuE
148
UTILITI4S
16.??
30':L3
1?/07/90
NOR THEPrt STATES POWE
148
UTILITIES
142.34
30843
1?/ 07/90
NOPTHEPN SrATcS POyE
148
UTIL ITTES
12'.99
30843
17/ 07/90
NO4THEPN STATE S POWE
148
UTIL ITIE S
237 .69
30,810
1;/07/70
NC-PTHEPN ST1.'� 5 D0•JE
148
UTII•XTI;j
• 75.70
3O%.4?
17 ('17194)
NOP THE P': STATES Pr: -1.'F
148
UTIL 771;5
39?.�5
30843
12/07/90
NOP THE PN STATES PUVF
148
OT TL STIES
8+2.34
7.70?
.02
•;HECF I"'�
30841,
1?/01/90
NODWEST INVESTMENT S
155
COMPUTER PAYMENT ?.407
.61
30045
I'/07/4')
O.E I. BUSINESS FQFM
158
COPY PAPEP/CITY MALL
771,. IU
30848
12/07/90
^MANN BROTHEPS. TNC.
334
CLASS V/STREET OEPT
54..14,
30947
12/07/90
C'OtV.A OOT RECYCLTNG
170
RECVCLING CONTRACT 1.004
.27
30548
1?J' 01-nO
PP >ItSE+; U %NINC, S113
CLEA'JIr+C• 5FP'/IC; /:102
50 •'OD
?001.13
12f oil TO
Po 15iE'S OIse'rat <3 s
173
CLEAr:Ir* q.EPjf,I'V MAL
400.'06
AS0.00
39111-9
17/01/90
09"ti gSTIO•+AL SEPVICE
17$W.11P
MONTFII.V CO!ITP ?1.Ori5.03
?OE 40
+2/t17./9:1
179..1i"
.?::.,.E SUP/." trat.
•5'..S'
?0?91
1?..j1. 1"j
o.;YAI TIL. OF M0'1TIC
2.27
TIOS-SJWA"?P DEPT
1-0rj
30'.51
12/01/90
0-:00L TIDE OF MONTIC.
227
VEHI-LE ?EPATRS/FIFE 0 55.00
210 .61-
•<MEC1 t•
3t»3?
+2/ 07; ' ,
ol... AUTO P1,PTS
200
VEH "EPATP PART;/STP;
2:5 .00
30043
I?/07/7')
SMITM 0 HAVES
194
PROF SER/SANgBERG EAS
117.75
30853
1?/0)/9')
SMITH 6 WAVES
104
MISC PROF SERVICES
599.30
30053
17/07/00
SMITH 8 WAVES
too
PROF SER/SEWAGE SLUOE
74.00
30033
12/07/!)0
SMIrH 6 HAVES
194
MISC SFP/1 9S TRANSPr.OT
51 .p3
E
0RC F�iNAN�,IA•L .,
12/06 /90' 1;x:'36:1.0-
'Di.3�l1+�9{I,A)rl L'.101/•i•�13'1,-'
i
P'i•)1:
nY_•i'.tOT
ri, dl- 3,
732•51
•:HEC`' To,
3Q851.
l i;r (1 .7/90
.cuf Ei, /�i: :.`.'/
1N5
A': a°C•$`•t:.T .:..J'r: �•:T G
��h�. 5C+
30355
+?/02/90
T4l•NOOI$T Pepco r0.1.•
208
PAPER TOWELS/CITY HALL
26.57
30856
1?/07/90
Uri ITOG PENTAI• SF?VIC -
211
UNIFORM DENTAL
?5.00
30SSG
1;/07190
UI:IT.),^, C$n TAS. SEPvjt
211
1RJ1F0z- R_NJpL
73 ?5
3x1856
12/07/90
L+r/ETOG RENT Al. SERV IC
211
UNIFOPM RENrAL
°.5?
30056
1?107/90'VN17-IC,
PENIAL SERVIi
211
UNTFORM RENTAL
3.52'
30856
12/01/90
UNI -TGG RENTAL SFRVIC
211
UVIFORM RENTAL
30.00
166.49
•CHECV TG
30857
1?/07/90
WE(N/JERF'i
385
TRA iNIr+G/TPAVEL/C1V 0
201.0?
30CSO
1?/07/90
W9LFS7ELLEP/PTCHA.O
217
M'1NTHLY MILEAGE AL'.CW
300.00
30859
12/07/90
WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITO
210
SHERIFF'S CCNTRACT 12.506.71
30660
17107/90
WPjGHT CO,1rJTY P.ECO;'O
256
RECO:'OTNG CEES/7TH ST
20.00
?0$E..1
I?IC17190
Y.M..:.A. OF-1NNEAPP
226
CONTPACT DA'1MFrrr
625.0'3
30£G?
1;/^7140
Y•'?r:A' L1d:(+FI4L. INC.
?23
h'1EC OUMDIN,/STREETS
153.00
P
30862
1?/07i91)
YON%K LAr,OFI!.L. INC.
223
A00 LANO FILL CHARG 6.2?5.05
5.LL5.95
;ye•;r TM
CN 4tu
1610. IE 7 . 60
C
BP.0 FI)IAr)CTAL 'rY512re
12/08/90
08;07':46
_
O ZsJur3e:n±ntjournal.
VA,PRAHT
DATE
VEnOOA;
OESCR10T10N
Ar, 0UNT
CLAIM 'IP
1'
LIQUOR FLING
,
15408
11/21/90
JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA
8000?2
WINE PURCHASE
319.26
15409
11/'21/90
JOHNSON PROS WHOLESA
90002?
1.10LIOR 9''VRCMASE
981 .?1
1 .300.48
.f HF,CK TOT
15409
111 ?i/90
CEOAR MAP COMPANY
800084
MISC SUPPLIES
134.00
154 t0
11/21/90
MINN DEPART OF PUBLI
800088
LIQUOR LICENSE
12.00
15411
11/?1/9U
P1171,I.TI'S A SONS CO/E
800037
LIQUOR PURCHASE,
1.4??.n5
'
15411
tt/?t/S•?
C�HTLLICS E, SO.-IS C6/E
000037
WINE PURCHASE
777.66
2.209.91
*CHECK TOT
15417
11/?1/90
13RIOOS. COOPEP 6COM
800016
LIQUOR PURCHASE
4.152.37
15417
11 / ?1/CIO
FA.I,E NINE CClMDANK
90.1012
WINE Ptlprly ASe
56.0
15413
11/ 2119.3
SALE WINE COMOAI+N
200612
MISC PUc•;HASES
13.87
75.79
-CHECK TOT
15414
IIf?1/90
OLIALIIY W111E L SPIRI
900040
WINE PURCHASE
801.00
1$414
11/ 21/90
OUALITY WINE b SPTRI
900040
LIOVOR PURCHASE
60.09
961,09
•CHECK. T07
15415
11/ 21/90
JOHNSON BROS 'WHOLESA
800022'WINE
PURCHASE
1.751.21
15415
11/21/90
JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA
900022
LIQUOR CREDIT
15.1SCR
1..735.46
+CHECK TOT
L15416
11/ 21190
OAVMOR HAM;O
900009
MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES
195.99
15417
1,1/ 21/90
MONTICEL1.0 PRINTING
800057
MISC PRINTED FOPMS
115.70
15418
11/71/90
PHILLIPS 1 SONS CO/,E
600037
M16C SUPPLIES (DISCOUNT
0.01
15418
11/71/90
PHILLIPS a SONS COTE
800037
WINE PURCHASE
57,1.53
15416
1;+Y 71/90
PHILLIPS 8 SONS CC4E
800037
LIOUOR PURCHASE
002.13
1.319.)7
.RC'MECK TOT'
14418
11/21/99
£4GVE WINE COM001V
800012
WINE PURCHASE
297.84
1$470
1 t lleg(V
3PT61is.'000PEP 8 CC.!!
8000/0
LIQUOR PURCHASE
7.09).70
I
ulNk & S;PIPT
600040
tI,000P PUPCHASE
1.052.10
15471
1'1/ 2.1/90
OVAL -TTY WINE 8 'SPIPI
000040
WINE PURCHASE
720.92
2.300.92
•rMEty T•;,
141.79
•1'/;1(91
404;)SON EPOS WHOI.ESA
9000??
LIOVOR PURC!'''ISF.
2.779.06
15472
1'11'.1)9•}
,,10-NSON 09'05 Wml)LES•
300027
WINE PUPCHASE
1.060.37
3.1!8S.43
-CHECK T•'
154?)
I I/ 71/.90
OL SON 4 SONS ELECTPI
1100036
REPAIR LIGHTS
199.77
0
oisburiem*qt j6ij�nai,
�:ARR_AfJT dkTJE� E
0 E S� R I P T I �,,HL
I A It:
lj
LIOU04, FUND;
t$424
1117(;/90 0 IJ a, L IT I E 8n'SPIk,I
300040
WINE SPIRITS
.,03
`151.25
11/30/90 "m I I-,. I P S p C.0/9
9n0037
WINE-ok'cCHAsq
64,-.'?6
5t�?5
ILI/ 1ej".90 P F'l I c,:: (.'Of S
?000:? )-L
10,P)p PIJP.ClqcsE
9?091,
I ,$& 3 20
&CHECK TOT
,15671,
11/30/90' ;0cM WIN; COMPANY
800012.
WINE PURCHASE
184.,39
15426
11/30/1:0SAGLF WIMF Cl-l."PAtii
900012
BEEP PbocHi,-F
23-.16&
207 .55
-CHS-:K TOT
15427
11/30/90 CPICG$. COOPER f COM
800010
LIOUOR PURCHASE
4.980.97
I r3h ?7
11!30/90 GRIGGS. COOPER & COM
000018
MISC SUP/CREDIT OUE
i'. 54CP
1979.3e
VCHECK TOT
154 713
1 1 t 3fj/ 90 •JOmtJ$ON SPOS WHOL ESA
800022
WINE PURCHASE
1.704.59,
15429
11/30/90 GRIGCS6 COOPER & COM
800019
LIQUOR PURCHASE
14.356.65,
15630
11/30/90 PHILLIP$ b SONS CO/E
800037
MINE PURCHASE
660.96
151.30
11/30/90 011TI.ItPS f SONS CO/E
000037
LIQUOR PURCHASE
?.$94.76
2.965.77
-CHECK TOT
15431
I W.40/90 FAGI.E WINE COMPANY
900012*mIlIC'SUPPLIES
57.36
15431
11/30/10 EAGLE WINE COMPANY
900012
WINE PURCHASE
600.07
717.83
*CHECK TOT
4.100OP
TOTAL
U,�
,L,
114
8RC FINANCIAL SY'ST'EM
12/06/00 1.5:43 :41
Di sbursemgnt Juurne 1
wARPANT
06,TE
':$uO^F.
E'ESC4TfiT[OM
Am-hldT
LIOUOR r-U:JD
1543?
12/07/90
A t• M PROOUCTS
800088
VINE TASTING CADDIES 80.00
15433
Q/0 7/90
F:EPrJICY.'S Pc PSI COLA
800001
POP PUrrCHASE
259.90
15634
12/07/90
BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON
800092
PHONE CHAPGES
93.82
15435
12/07/90
CITY OF MONTICELLO
800003
SEVER AND WATER BILL 76.45
15430
1?/07/90
COAST TO COAST
900006
MAINT OF BUILOIN,
14?.74
1S437
12/07/90
COMMISSICNER OF REVE
800005
SALES TAX DUE FOR N
9.484.53
15438
17/07/90
OAHLHEIMeR OISTR)BUT
800009
BEER PURCHASE
19.779.62
15439
12/0 7/90
CIA'? OTSTPISUTINn CO"
800010
MI( PUPCHASC
47. 15
15439
1?/0 7/90
OAY C157P1&OTlN , CO"
00010
BEER P1!P{HAr'+5
450.69
507.55
1$660
1?/07/?0
OIC' S:VEPWGS C(:,MPArJ
*00011
BEEP PURCHASE
1.694.60
IY.60
14/01/9.)
PICK BSV;PI.E f:_McprJ
500011
41SC OP5CATI'4, FVPE•_7E
71.00
15441
1?/07/90
EAGLE WINE CCMCANY
900012
LIME JUICE MIX
.'.5.40
15461
12/07/90
SD,LE VINE C.)MPANY
800012
VINE PUPCHAS£
391.76
434.25
15442
11/07/90
FL9-!P.7Y,S HAPPY TrM
!!04091
TOM ANO.!EPOV M! )f
77.00
15643
12/07/90
GRIGGS. COOPER Sk, COM
800018
LIOUOR PURCHASE
3.557.64
15644
12/07/90
GP.OSS'LEIN BEVERAGE I
800019
BEER PURCHASE
12.865.02
15A45
12/07190
H A 14 INOUSTRIE S. IN
800090
LIGHT 15ULOS
60. C5
10466
12/07/90
HAMILTON/SAP.BARA
900089
MAINT OF 8LO/PATHT1N0
453.44
15447
12/07/90
JUDE CAPOY •, TOBACCO
800021
CIGARS b CIGS
109.52
15647
17/07/90
JUOE CANDY F T03ACCO
*00071
PAPER GAGS
201.8?
15447
12/07/90
JUDE CANDY 6 TOBACCO
900021
MISC OPERATI1JG SUPOLIE
81.75
684.09
151.1,8
12/01/00
KOLLES SANITATION
800023
GARBAGE'. SERVICE
201.40
1544'7
1^/77/50
VR1" RADIO SIATIDN
800026
AOVE6TISINr,
170.00
1SI.50
12/071TO
LAPSEN FURNITURE • C
800090
NEW LIrJOLEU" IN SATHR 200.00
15651
17/07/90
LIE -ERT TRUCKING
800025
FREIGHT CHAPGES
708.60
CL AIM Ili
'CHECK TOT
":MEC.. Tt?7
I
•CHECK TO'
•rH1Ef:K TOT
ro
ru
gRC' caNAnGj'AL 'SY,STEM-- _
i2%06%0.0'-''.�Sey9 Oi's_OuP-semsnrLl,ou�t+,a•_t. -.
( WARRANT DATE y;E�{h O? OE,SCRIP-TjOjr _AMOVMT
�LIOUOR' FUND
15452 ,17/07,/90 MOUS FOOOS 600027 MISC OP,ERAT,ING SUPPLIE 26.84
. 151.53 12/07/90 MIDt+cST GAS 6001028 UTILITIES 110.59
+5454 12/07,/90 MOrr.TICELLO TIMES 800032 ADVERTISING
15455 12/01490 NORTHERN STATES POVE '800035 UTILITIES
1565-/07/1?n s•n:: 'r Ifs �0,141I.tY 6000"1 :r_ .?or He SE 9$.70
151.57 12/07/90 SERVICE SALES CO4POR 80004? MISC OPERATING SVPPLIE 59.72
1545E 1?/01/90 SEVEN-UP 60TTLIUG CO 000043 POP P1IRCHASE 149.?S -
15'.59 1?/n?/90 Sr. 1:1.990 RESTAURANT 900045 ORAUGE JUICE 90.60
+?/07/90 ST. ;L4V0 91aSTAUPANT 800045 ,LASSES.OPEr+ERS,MIX.ET 70,65
151.59 12/07/90 ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT 800045 MISC OPERATING- SUPPLIE 44.05
166.70 •CHECA TOT.
15460 +?/07/90 THr±PPE DISTRIBUTING 800048 BEER PURCHASE 10.563.35
15461 1?/07/'9O VIKING, CC'CA-COLA BOT 800051 POP PURCHASE +53.00
15482 12/07/90 ZEE MEDICAL•SERVICE 600054 MISC OPERATING SUPPI.IE 21.00, P
L101M' FUND TOTAL 59.494.35
1
CITY or IIORrICBW.O
,Monthly Building. Department Rrport
,Month of NOVEMBER . 1990
-
PDDIITO AILD USPS
PERMITS ISSUED
feet
Thi• - aaae Menti L+
C Tur
-Thl• Year
Ibnth October
Mmth November Leat
Vaar To
Del•
ro De to
RPSIDPMIAL
pualxr18
9
2
101
172
veluetlon
B 214.000.00
9 121,800.00 B
53.500.00 52.926.400.00
62,206,000.00
ysaa
1,841.26
1,139.15
455.69
21,402.96
18,548.88
i BurcNrpae
104.00
59.90
26.65
1,435.75
1,057.20
COMPtsRr1AL
"-b"
2
2
1
21
28
Veluatton
19,500.00
295.000.00
3,100.00 1 . 751,000.00
5,059,300.00
►saa
526.65
2,191.97
51.00
11.803.SS
18,298.55
9-chergaa
9.50
147.50
2.60
674.80
1,566.90
IMOUSTRIAI.
IAwTer
I
I
1
1
9
valuation
22.400.00
2.000.00
80,000.00
80.000.00
2,860,500.00
Page
228.60
20. SO
549.50
549.50
17,281.10
■urehmroaa
11.20
1.00
40.00
40.00
1,450.13
MAIMM Ia6
Mumher
4
2
1
34
4t
Pea•
77.00
67.00
25.00
11060.00
1.159.00
/uccherpea
2.00
1.00
.50
17.00
20.50
om■Ra
Rulwb•r
1
I
e
7
valuation
00.00
0.00
00.00
95.000.00
Pea•
10.00
10.0060.00
1,110.80
WrcNrgae
.50
.50
4.00
50.00
TOTAL W. PERMITS
26
14
6
167
217 '
TOTAT. VALUATION
1 233,900.00
6 419.800.00 1
156,400.00 14. 757,400.00
68,200,600.00
tOTAJ. Pira
6 2,485.11
8 5,416.10 $
1,061.19 6
54,896.01
1 53.326.24
TOTAL. WACIIARGES
9 177.20
6 209.40 8
70.25 1
71589.55
1 4.104.75
OIRRRNt IRNRII
Pau
- IIna mr
to UAts
FIRM LT aATUR6
Muehar PRRMlr ' auammas
Ve lu•Llon
Tula Yaar
Ieat Vaar
61.911 really
1 1
402.61 1 24.40
6 48.600.00
27
25
Dupla
0
0
Multbtul ly,
1
2
C-•relal
6
I
Ind[alrte1.
4
p
Rei. lingo*
I
60.00 2.50
51000.00
e
1
■Il9m
0
0
Pub110 Dol Ldhlpe
1
0
RLTBRATIOM Cut REPAIR
Dtaellinpe
6
671.30 52.30
66,500.00
78
56
L -104a1
2 2.195.17 147.50
213.000.00
22
22
Induatrtol
1
20.00 1.00
2.000.00
S
I
PLIDUSi a
All Types
2
65.00 1.00
41
54
ACCReeoRT STIRUCTURB■
0P1min9 Paola
2
0
Usok•
1
15.00 .50
11500.00
17
IS
T■MPORMY P4RM1T
0
0
UAg1.1T10M
5
e
TOTAI.e
14 15.414.10
4 209.40
9 418.100.00
217
167
TOTAL REVIEW 6 3.625.50
IHDIVIDDAL PCIL::T ACTIVITY REPORT
Meath .1 0VF--MFR . 19Sa
PERMIT I
OCSCR IPTION
TYPE
NAME/LGCATTON
VALUATION
PER1[IT
REB
fiJRCRAROE PLUMBING
SURCHARGE
90-1603
Porch Raroof
AD
Gerald and Michelle Hansen/407 W. 4th S[.
f 1.500.00
f 15.00 f
.50
90-1604
Besemen[ FSnlsh
AD
kifll4am end Mary Ft eh/2601 Maedw Oek Ln.
1.500.00
15.00
.50
90-1606
Garage Add 1[fon vlth Storage
AD
David end Diane Hyt[s[en/901 W. River S[.
30.000.00
284.50
15.00
Above Foyer
90-1607
Enclose Load lnR Dock
Al
The Sa rv. Eq.6 Mfg. Co./201 Cho lace Rd.
2.000.00
20.00
1.00
90-16CO
Deck
AD
Dayls Vcchee Const./211 Mery to Elvoad Rd.
in
1,500.00
15.00
.50
90-1609
Caraga Addition. Foyer.
AD
Hark and Joanna Burandt/124 Ln.
17,000.00
180.00
8.50
Nav Vl.dova, and Siding
90-1610
Detached Ga raga
RC
Lae Nygaard/619 E. 416 St.
5.000.00
50.00
2.50
90-1611
House and Garage
SF
Value Plus Nomas/116 Crocus Lena
48,800.00
766.07
24.40 1
27.00
/ .50
90-1612
The.- Addition Above Grade
AC
M1km Muilarl119 E. Broedvay
292,000.00
1,711.50
146.00
40.00
.50
90-I e1J
Fuv Roo[ cud Rernof
AL
Tripp Ofl Co an' L'. 11 -d -y
].000.00
70.00
1.50
90-1614
Carege Addition, Deck, Nav Siding
AD
Lenne re Lustom Noma a/1802 E. River St.
15.000.00
162.00
7.50
,
Inlarlor Reflnleh
90-1615
Basement Egress W1ndw
AD
Mark and Dlena Kruse/!IB E. River S[.
1,500.00
15.00
.50
TOTALS
k 418.800.00
{2,464.07 S
208.40 5
67.00
1 1.00
PLAN REVIEW
90-1611
House and Caraga
SF
Value Plus Ilomee/116 Crocus Lana
S 76.60
90-1612
Th re Addtllon Above Floer
AC
MfYe Mull orl119 E. Broedvay
fll2.47
TOTAL PLAN REVIEW
5 8X9.07
TOTAL REVIEW 6 3.625.50